• Trainee scaffolder died after falling five metres from a partially erected scaffold while working on a housing development in North Yorkshire.
• HSE found the company had failed to ensure scaffolding work was carried out safely and in accordance with industry guidance.
• The investigation found that safe zones had not been established and workers were not using harnesses or lanyards.

A scaffolding company has been fined after a trainee scaffolder died in a five-metre fall from a partially erected scaffold.

On 5 July 2023, Michael Swales was working for Ask Scaffolding Ltd, which had been contracted to provide scaffolding services for a residential housing development near Ripon in North Yorkshire.

Mr Swales and a colleague were erecting scaffolding at the front of a two-storey house under construction when he fell five metres after standing on an unsecured scaffolding board. There were inadequate measures in place to prevent or mitigate the risk of a fall. Emergency services attended, but Mr Swales died at the scene.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that Ask Scaffolding Ltd had failed to ensure work at height was carried out in a safe manner, so far as was reasonably practicable.

The investigation found that the scaffolding work being carried out on the day of the accident was unsafe and did not follow industry guidance. Safe zones had not been established, and neither Mr Swales nor his colleague was using a harness or lanyard while working.

The investigation also found that previous scaffolding work had not been carried out in accordance with the guidance. A post-accident inspection identified that guardrails had not been installed where they should have been. Several witnesses also indicated that scaffolding work was regularly carried out by company operatives without following the guidance.

The guidance identifies the use of collective protection measures to create a ‘Scaffolder’s Safe Zone’ as the primary means of preventing falls. Personal protection, such as a harness and lanyard, should be used when a scaffolder is working without a safe zone.

All scaffolding must be erected, dismantled and altered safely. Guidance on the measures employers and scaffolding contractors should take to ensure scaffolding work is carried out safely can be found here: Scaffolds – HSE.

Ask Scaffolding Ltd, of Thornton Road Industrial Estate, Pickering, YO18 7JB, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 4(1)(c) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. The company was fined £16,000 and ordered to pay £8,000 in costs and a £2,000 victim surcharge at Leeds Magistrates’ Court on 4 November 2026.

HSE Inspector David Beaton said:

“This tragic accident underlines the importance of those in control of scaffolding work making sure that it is being done safely and in accordance with industry guidance, and the potential consequences where this is not done.

“Our thoughts remain with Michael’s family and friends.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Iain Jordan and paralegal officer Zara Salman.

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 are available.
4. Guidance on scaffolding can be found on the HSE website.
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 in England can be found here.

• Worker’s right hand trapped between the print rollers of machinery
• The woman had worked as a machinery operator for 11 years
• HSE investigation found that the company failed to prevent access to dangerous parts of machinery

A manufacturer of napkins and other thin ply paper products has been fined after a worker’s hand became trapped in machinery at its site in St Helens.

The experienced worker, who had been a machine operator for 11 years was cleaning the rollers of a machine that is used to emboss logos and emblems onto tissue paper before folding the napkins into shape. As she was doing this, her right hand was drawn into the machine and was trapped for several minutes.

She sustained serious injuries to her right hand including full amputations to her little finger and ring finger and partial amputations to her index and middle finger. She also has increased sensitivity in the hand. She is unable to manage daily tasks such as cooking and cannot take part in her hobbies such as cycling, knitting, and gardening due to the injury being on her dominant hand.

An investigation by the HSE found that the machine did not have an interlocked guard to prevent access to the print rollers. Therefore the dangerous moving parts of the machine could be accessed by any employee while the machine was operating. In addition to this, the company had previously been served with enforcement for other machinery guarding issues during site inspections in 2021, 2019, 2014, and 2010.

HSE guidance states employers must take effective measures to prevent access to dangerous parts of machinery.  This will normally be fixed or interlocked guards which prevent persons coming into contact with those parts; this was the expected control in this instance.  Further guidance can be found here Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER) – HSE.

Duni Poppies Limited of Cornwall Street, St Helens pleaded guilty to breaching The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998, Regulation 11(1).  The company was fined £80,000 and order to pay £4,756 in costs at Warrington Magistrates Court on 3 November 2026.

HSE inspector Gemma Feerick said:

“This avoidable incident led to an experienced employee suffering life changing injuries.

“If the company had properly assessing the risks and applied the correct control measures to prevent access to dangerous parts of machinery, it would have been avoided.

“We will not hesitate to take action against companies who fall below the expected standards and fail to keep people safe.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Julian White and paralegal officer Ella Loveday.

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 can be found here.

• AJ Riley Landscapes and Building Limited were fined £20,000
• The worker suffered fractures to his ribs, vertebrae and pelvis after falling approximately 10 metres
• Falls from height remain one of the leading causes of workplace fatalities

A Lancashire based construction and landscaping company has been fined £20,000 after a worker suffered serious injuries when he fell through the fragile roof of a barn.

Josh Huddleston, 47, who was employed by AJ Riley Landscapes and Building Limited, was replacing a damaged skylight on the roof of the barn when the incident occurred on 24th February 2025. He suffered fractures to his ribs, vertebrae and pelvis after falling approximately 10 metres.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that AJ Riley Landscapes and Building Limited had failed to adequately plan the work and ensure appropriate control measures were in place to prevent Mr Huddleston from falling through the fragile roof.

The investigation also found that workers had not received sufficient training to ensure they were competent in the use of the control measures identified in the company’s risk assessment.

HSE guidance states that employers must ensure work at height is properly planned, appropriately supervised and carried out by competent people. Where work at height is necessary, employers must take suitable and sufficient measures to prevent, so far as is reasonably practicable, anyone falling a distance liable to cause personal injury.

Work on fragile roofs presents significant risks and employers and contractors must ensure appropriate precautions are in place before work begins. HSE’s guidance on working on roofs provides further information on managing these risks.

AJ Riley Landscapes and Building Limited, of Caton, Lancashire, 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 £4,955 in costs at Warrington Magistrates’ Court on 3 November 2026.

Following the hearing, HSE inspector Matthew Shepherd said:

“Falls from height remain one of the leading causes of workplace fatalities. It is fortunate that Mr Huddleston survived this fall, which could easily have resulted in fatal injuries.

“The risks associated with working at height on fragile roof surfaces are well known. AJ Riley Landscapes and Building Limited failed to ensure appropriate control measures were in place to prevent a worker falling through the roof.

“Suitable precautions are readily available, and this incident could have been prevented through proper planning, risk assessment and the implementation of effective control measures.

“This prosecution should serve as a reminder to all employers and contractors undertaking work at height that they have a duty to protect their workers. HSE will not hesitate to take enforcement action against those who fail to meet their legal responsibilities.”

The prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Gemma Zakrzewski and paralegal officer Henrietta Burrows.

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.
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.

• Niall Fawcett died when he was struck by a truck while he was working beneath it on the M56 slip road in Cheshire.

• HSE found the company failed to properly assess risks of replacing a blown-out tyre on a low-profile truck.
• Victim was not adequately supervised or monitored despite only holding roadside licence for less than four months.

A commercial tyre service provider in Worcestershire has been fined following the death of 21-year-old employee Niall Fawcett, who was killed while carrying out a roadside repair.

On 2 August 2024, Mr Fawcett was called out to replace a blown-out tyre on a low-profile truck on the slip road at junction 7 of the M56 motorway near Bowdon. While he was positioned beneath the truck, it is understood to have slipped from the bottle jack (a compact hydraulic lifting tool designed for vehicle support) being used to raise the vehicle and landed on him, causing fatal head injuries.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that Halford Commercial Fleet Services Limited, formerly known as Lodge Tyre Company Limited (The), had not properly assessed the risks associated with replacing a blown-out tyre on a low-profile vehicle. The company had also failed to give employees suitable work instructions, including information on when a truck should be recovered rather than repaired at the roadside.

The investigation also found that Mr Fawcett had only obtained his licence to work on commercial tyres at the roadside when he joined the company less than four months before his death. Despite this, he had not been subject to any monitoring or supervision to ensure that he was working safely.

The HSE publication Health and safety in motor vehicle repair and associated industries sets out the importance of providing safe systems of work and ensuring workers are competent to carry out their tasks.

The impact on Niall’s family

Niall’s mother, Sharon, said in her victim personal statement:

“Niall was only 21 years old when he died. He had his whole life ahead of him. He was planning to marry the following year and he and Megan were saving for a deposit on their first home together and talking about starting a family. Niall was building for a life he was excited for and this was taken from him in an instant.

“Niall went to work that day and should have been safe, supported and protected. Instead, my son never came home.”

Halford Commercial Fleet Services Limited, of Icknield Street Drive, Washford West, Redditch, Worcestershire B98 0DE, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The company was fined £600,000 and ordered to pay a victim surcharge of £200 and £24,203 in costs at Warrington Magistrates’ Court on 3 November 2026.

HSE Principal Inspector Laura Royales said:

“This case should serve to highlight to employers the importance of properly assessing the risks to which their workers are exposed and providing the right information and instructions, supplemented by adequate monitoring and supervision arrangements, to ensure that they can and do work safely.

Our thoughts remain with Niall’s family as they continue to come to terms with their tragic loss.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Matthew Reynolds and paralegal officer Benjamin Stobbart. The investigation was supported by Visiting Officer Natty Heath.

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 motor vehicle repair and associated industries
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.

• Private Jethro Watson-Pickering was killed during an exercise on Salisbury Plain
• 23-year-old died from head injuries after gun barrel of his armoured vehicle struck a tree on 15 October 2021
• MOD issued with Crown Censure by Health and Safety Executive

The Ministry of Defence (MOD) has been issued with a Crown Censure by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) after a British Army soldier died during a routine training exercise on Salisbury Plain.

The censure follows an investigation by HSE inspectors into the incident in 2021, which concluded the MoD had not met its duties under the Health and Safety at Work Act, and found inadequacies with the risk assessment, instructions and training for the exercise.

The incident

Private Jethro Watson-Pickering, of the 1st Battalion of the Yorkshire Regiment, was taking part in an exercise known as Iron Storm at the British Army’s Salisbury Plain training area in Wiltshire on 15 October 2021. The 23-year-old had been driving a Scimitar-variant Combat Vehicle Reconnaissance (Tracked) (CVR(T)) armoured fighting vehicle. Their role in the exercise was to drive armoured vehicles and act as the enemy for another Army regiment.

At around 11:50am the incident vehicle was escaping ‘attack’, when the gun barrel, protruding beyond the side of the vehicle, struck a tree. On impact, the turret rotated very quickly, and the rear storage bin attached to the it struck Private Watson-Pickering’s head, causing fatal injuries. He died at the scene.

HSE investigation

An investigation by the HSE found there was no safe system of work for driving the CVR(T) Scimitar during the exercise.

Risk assessments failed to identify the danger to the driver from the turret rotating without warning. As a result, no control measures were put in place to stop the driver’s head being struck by a storage box if the barrel was accidentally hit and the turret turned.

The investigation also found that risk assessments were not properly reviewed after similar incidents in previous years. Instruction and training were also inadequate, particularly on the risk of the turret rotating unintentionally and on driving with the head up.

Crown Censure

Following the investigation, a file was passed to HSE’s legal services division, which concluded there was sufficient evidence to pursue a Crown Censure.

A Crown Censure is the maximum sanction available to HSE against a Crown body. It acts as an official reprimand and provides a lasting, public record of a Crown body’s failure to comply with the law.

By accepting the Crown Censure, the MoD admitted breaching its duty under Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.

HSE inspector Emma O’Hara said:

“Our thoughts are first and foremost with the family and friends of Private Jethro Watson-Pickering, who must live with his loss.

“Just like any other employer, the MOD has a responsibility to take all reasonably practicable steps to control the risks to the safety of its employees. In this case, it failed to do so, which has cost a young man his life.

“While realistic exercises are an essential component of military training, this does not mean employees should face uncontrolled or inadequately controlled risks.

“Training exercises must be properly planned, with risks identified and mitigated, to prevent future tragic incidents like this one.”

The HSE Crown Censure was brought by HSE enforcement lawyers Rebecca Schwartz and Tom Ledden-Rocks, and paralegal officer Helen Jacob.

Further information:

1. The Health and safety Executive (HSE) is Britain’s national regulator for workplace health and safety.
2. The breach of law the Censure is being issued over is: Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, which states that: “It shall be the duty of every employer to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees”.
3. There is no financial penalty associated with Crown Censure, but once accepted is an official record of a failing to meet the standards set out in law.
4. Crown Censure is the process by which HSE holds Crown bodies to account for serious breaches of health and safety law. You can find a record of Crown Censures issued by HSE at: Crown Censures taken by HSE since 1 April 1999.

An independent government oversight review has found that the UK’s stewardship regime for professional rodenticide use has delivered important safeguards for human health, animal health and the environment, and should continue but with strengthened monitoring and support for users. 

The review was carried out by the UK Rodenticide Stewardship Government Oversight Group (GOG), a cross-government body chaired by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) on behalf of its members. HSE is publishing the review’s findings on behalf of GOG. 

The GOG review found that the stewardship approach has delivered clear benefits. It has put in place effective governance of the supply chain, ensuring professional rodenticide products are only sold through approved outlets to trained users operating as part of an integrated pest management strategy. It has also built a more competent workforce, improving users’ understanding of, and approach to, rodent control, and established consistent monitoring that allows the environmental impacts of rodenticide use to be measured and assessed. 

Importantly, the review also found that stewardship has not yet delivered a measurable reduction in total second generation anticoagulant rodenticide residues in barn owls compared with the pre-stewardship baseline, meaning a key performance measure has not been met. The GOG review is clear that this finding does not mean risk has gone unmitigated and does not represent an overall failure of stewardship. Without the steps already taken to improve workforce competence and restrict access to trained, competent users, GOG’s view is that the risks to human health, animal health and the environment would likely be greater than they are today. 

GOG has recommended that stewardship, and the Campaign for Responsible Rodenticide Use UK (CRRU UK) regime, should continue, but be strengthened. Additional measures include extending environmental monitoring, funding new analysis of residues, developing further insight into key user groups, and improving how information is delivered to users. 

Richard Daniels, Director of Chemicals Regulation Division at HSE said: 

“Anticoagulant rodenticides are powerful tools, which would not normally be approved. They are only authorised for use because they are essential to protect human health, animal health and the environment from the serious risks posed by rodent infestations. That is precisely why it’s so important that they are used responsibly. 

“This independent review reports that stewardship is working in putting significant safeguards in place, ensuring these products reach only trained, competent users who understand how to use them safely and effectively.  

“HSE will now consider the Oversight Group’s report and recommendations in strengthening the scheme further, for example through better monitoring and support for those who use these products when it considers, alongside other information, whether rodenticides should continue to be authorised for use.” 

Ends 

Notes to editors 

1. The UK Rodenticide Stewardship Government Oversight Group (GOG) is an independent, cross-government body. HSE chairs the group and is publishing this report on its behalf. 
2. The Campaign for Responsible Rodenticide Use UK (CRRU UK) is an industry-led stewardship scheme introduced in 2016. 
3. Anticoagulant rodenticides are among the most effective tools available for controlling rats and mice, but their toxicity means they do not meet the normal criteria for authorisation under biocides legislation. They are permitted only because the active substances they contain have been assessed as essential to prevent serious danger to human health, animal health and the environment, and because not authorising them would cause disproportionate harm to society compared with the risks of their use. This conclusion was reached by the European Commission in 2017 and remains the basis for their continued availability. 
4. In 2016, industry introduced the Campaign for Responsible Rodenticide Use UK (CRRU UK) stewardship regime to minimise exposure and the risk to people, animals and the environment, restricting supply of professional products to trained, competent users and requiring ongoing environmental monitoring. 
5. At the time, government and industry agreed the scheme would be reviewed after 5 years to assess whether it was delivering its intended benefits, including a measurable reduction in rodenticide residues found in barn owls, used as a sentinel species for wider environmental exposure. 
6. HSE is currently carrying out routine renewal assessments of anticoagulant rodenticide products. The conclusions and recommendations of the GOG report will be taken into account as part of this decision-making process.  
7. Government Oversight Group report is available here. 

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has today published its response to a consultation on proposals to strengthen the regulatory framework for managing asbestos.

The consultation sought views on three proposals regarding the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 (CAR 2012), all aimed at reducing exposure to legacy asbestos, which remains a  risk in Great Britain due to its use in construction before being banned in 1999.

The responses have led to HSE making a regulatory change to strengthen independence and impartiality in the four-stage clearance process. HSE will amend regulation 20 of CAR 2012, which covers standards for air testing and site clearance certification, to remove the potential conflicts of interest that may arise when the LARC appoints the asbestos analyst.

Later this year, HSE will update the Approved Code of Practice (L143) Managing and working with asbestos – HSE and Asbestos: The Analysts’ Guide – HSE, and has developed simple online guidance to help dutyholders appoint third-party service providers with confidence. Industry will have 12 months to comply with the changes.

In addition, HSE continues to strongly recommend that dutyholders use accredited organisations when commissioning asbestos surveys and is developing further guidance and interventions to help dutyholders understand the critical role a quality survey plays in managing asbestos risk safely.

Finally, the consultation has resulted in the category of work known as Notifiable Non-Licensed Work (NNLW) being retained. HSE will work collaboratively with industry to develop improved guidance to support the correct use of this category.

Across all three proposals, responses consistently pointed to behaviours and competence, particularly around dutyholder understanding of their responsibilities under the regulations, commissioning practices, and the practical application of regulatory requirements. This evidence will be used to inform the design of further interventions and guidance.

Rick Brunt, Director of Engagement and Policy at HSE, said:

“Thanks to those who responded, we gathered substantial evidence helping us to develop a greater understanding of the issues that underlined each of the proposals and to help support policy development and decision-making.

“We are now able to confidently strengthen asbestos safety regulations and make changes to guidance that will help us deliver on our commitment to reduce asbestos exposure across Great Britain.”

Minister for Social Security and Disability, Sir Stephen Timms, said:

“The dangers of exposure to asbestos are well known. Its terrible legacy from its use in the past remains a risk for many people in the present.

“To protect people in Britain, we have a mature and well-established approach to the management of asbestos in buildings.

“Today we are strengthening this protection to improve the safety of our workers and the public from asbestos exposure.”

The publication of the consultation response follows the laying of a Statutory Instrument in parliament to amend the regulations which will come into force on 24 November 2026, with industry having a year to comply before HSE enforces the change in November 2027.

HSE will continue to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of these changes once implemented. The outcomes in response to the consultation represent the delivery of the three outstanding recommendations made by the 2022 Work and Pensions report on the HSE’s approach to asbestos management accepted by the previous Government.

 Notes to editors

• The consultation, “Legislative and guidance proposals for the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012”, ran from 10 Nov 2025 to 9 Jan 2026 and received 358 responses.
• The consultation looked at three separate proposals:

1. Proposal to  ensure the independence and impartiality of roles in the four-stage clearance process
2. Proposal to improve the quality of asbestos surveys
3. Proposal to clarify the type of work that constitutes work with asbestos known as Notifiable Non-Licensed Work (NNLW)

• The full consultation response is available at Legislative and guidance proposals for the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 – Health and Safety Executive – Citizen Space
• The Statutory Instrument will come into force on 24 November 2026 and is subject to parliamentary procedure.

• Work-related stress remains one of the leading causes of work-related ill health in Great Britain
• HSE is encouraging employers and managers to take practical action during Stress Awareness Week through its Working Minds campaign
• Free tools, guidance and resources are available to help employers identify and address the causes of stress

As Stress Awareness Week begins, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is encouraging employers and managers to take practical action to prevent and manage work-related stress.

Work-related stress remains one of the leading causes of work-related ill health in Great Britain. Left unaddressed, it can affect workers’ health and wellbeing, increase sickness absence and impact workplace performance.

The good news is that small actions can make a big difference. Whether it’s starting a conversation, reviewing workplace pressures or making use of available support, every workplace can take steps to reduce stress and support good mental health.

Many employers still do not realise that they must assess and manage the risks of work-related stress in the same way as other workplace health and safety risks. Identifying the causes of stress, assessing who may be affected and taking action to eliminate or control risks are important steps in protecting workers’ health and preventing harm.

Through its Working Minds campaign, HSE is encouraging employers and managers to take action using the 5Rs approach:

Reach Out – Start conversations about stress and mental wellbeing.

Recognise – Understand the signs and causes of stress.

Respond – Take action to address concerns and support workers.

Reflect – Review what is working and where improvements can be made.

Make it Routine – Embed good practice into everyday working life.

HSE is also highlighting its Management Standards approach, which helps employers identify and address six key areas of work that can contribute to stress if they are not managed effectively:

• Demands
• Control
• Support
• Relationships
• Role
• Change

By understanding these factors, engaging with workers and assessing associated risks, organisations can identify potential issues and take action before they affect health and productivity.

Kayleigh Roberts, HSE’s Work-Related Stress Policy Lead, said:

“Work-related stress is a health and safety issue. Employers should assess the risks of stress, and its impact on mental and physical ill-health, in the same way they assess other work-related health and safety risks.

By understanding the causes of stress, engaging with workers and taking action to eliminate or control risks, employers can help create workplaces where people feel supported, valued and able to perform at their best.

Stress Awareness Week is a valuable opportunity for employers and managers to review what they are doing, start conversations with workers and take practical steps to prevent work-related stress.”

HSE’s Working Minds campaign provides a range of free tools, guidance and resources, including the Talking Toolkit, Stress Indicator Tool, online learning modules and downloadable guidance materials.

During Stress Awareness Week, employers should:

• If necessary, review their stress risk assessment and ensure it reflects current workplace risks, identifying where further action may be needed to eliminate or control those risks.
• Use the Talking Toolkit to have structured conversations with workers.
• Discuss the six Management Standards areas with their teams.
• Encourage managers to access Working Minds training and resources.
• Consider how the 5Rs can be embedded into everyday workplace practices.

While Stress Awareness Week provides a valuable focus, preventing and managing work-related stress should remain a priority throughout the year. Regular conversations, meaningful engagement with workers, effective risk assessment and action to eliminate or control workplace risks can help build healthier, more productive and more resilient workplaces.

For free tools, guidance and resources, visit the Working Minds campaign.

Further information:

1. Employers have a legal duty to assess and manage risks to workers’ health, including risks to mental health.
2. The Working Minds campaign provides free resources, including the Talking Toolkit, Stress Indicator Tool, Management Standards guidance and online learning modules.
3. Stress Awareness Week takes place from 2-6 November 2026.
4. For interview requests, case studies or further information, contact the HSE Press Office at [email protected].

• Photos taken after fire on roof of apartment block show damage
• Four workers forced to flee blaze with just one ladder as their escape route
• No fire extinguishers, no means of raising the alarm and no permit for welding work
• C Watkins Plumbing Limited fined after HSE investigation finds company failed to follow its own hot works procedures

Shocking photographs taken in the aftermath of a fire on the roof of an apartment block in Surrey show how lucky four workers were to escape.

A contractor has been fined after the workers had to flee a fire that engulfed the roof of a 14-storey apartment building under construction in Surrey.

The four subcontractors were working under the control of C Watkins Plumbing Limited, installing an air source heat pump on the roof of the Old Telephone Exchange development in Staines-upon-Thames, when the incident happened on 26 June 2024.

Sparks from welding work ignited uncovered rigid foam insulation that had been laid across the roof. The self-sustaining fire developed quickly, spreading across the whole of the roof space before burning itself out when it ran out of fuel.

The men escaped through a single opening in the floor and down a ladder to Level 14. There was no other way off the roof, no means of raising the alarm, and no fire extinguishers.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that the company had failed to plan, manage and monitor the hot works on the roof. Despite the company having policies requiring them, there was no risk assessment or method statement in place, and a permit to work was not issued for the welding.

HSE’s guidance, HSG168 – Fire Safety in Construction, states that fire safety measures must be considered throughout all stages of design and procurement, and implemented effectively during construction. It says risk assessments must identify high-risk activities where fires can spread quickly, and situations where evacuation plans are complex, and that all risk assessments and control measures must be reviewed throughout the construction phase to make sure they remain suitable and sufficient.

C Watkins Plumbing Limited, of Watkins House, Leigh Road, Haine Industrial Park, Ramsgate, Kent, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 15(2) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015. The company was fined £20,000 and ordered to pay £8,270 in costs at Staines Magistrates’ Court on 29 October 2026.

HSE inspector Stephanie Hickford-Smith said:

“Watkins failed to follow its own procedures for hot works. It did not assess the risks and so had no control measures in place.

“The four men working on the roof were lucky to escape. Had the fire started closer to their escape route, or had they not acted as quickly as they did, the outcome could have been devastatingly different.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE senior enforcement lawyers James Towey and Laura Lax and paralegal officer Farhat Basir.

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.

• Simon Pedder was crushed under a reversing recovery truck and now needs crutches, a frame and a wheelchair.
• More than 10 months on, he has been unable to return to work and says, “life will never be the same”.
• HSE found the company had no suitable traffic management system and no adequate precautions for reversing vehicles – which remain a leading cause of workplace injury.

A Swindon-based vehicle recovery business has been fined after a worker was struck by a reversing vehicle and suffered life-changing injuries.

On 13 June 2025, Simon Pedder was undertaking yard duties at Cotswold Vehicle Recovery (Swindon) Limited in Highworth when he was suddenly hit and crushed under a company-owned recovery truck.

Mr Pedder suffered fractures to both legs and an arm, a punctured lung and a fractured rib. He was airlifted to the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford, where he spent five weeks and underwent several operations to rebuild his legs, including skin grafts.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that Cotswold Vehicle Recovery (Swindon) Limited had failed to implement a suitable traffic management system to make sure vehicles and pedestrians could circulate safely and had not implemented proper precautions to assist reversing drivers.

(Photographs showing before and after HSE intervention)

More than 10 months later, Mr Pedder’s recovery has not progressed as he had hoped. The extent of his injuries means that in addition to using crutches, a Zimmer frame and wheelchair, Simon now needs regular care visits and cannot carry out basic tasks like getting into the shower without help. He has been told he will most likely need walking aids for the rest of his life.

Describing the impact of the incident on his life, Mr Pedder said:

“I used to be a very sociable person, the life of the party, both in work and with friends; this has been taken away from me as now I spend my days sitting at home by myself. My mood is very low, and this is affecting not only myself but also my family, who say my personality appears to have changed completely.”

He added, “there are many basic things I can’t do, for example, I can’t cut the grass, I can’t fold the washing, I can’t go for a walk, and I am not allowed to drive. This accident took away my freedom.”

He also described the impact on his family, with his wife cutting short her working hours to support his care, and the family rearranging the living room to accommodate a hospital bed. Mr Pedder said: “I feel so bad because I am affecting those who are close to me. My life will never be the same and I feel like this accident should never have happened as I was only doing my job.”

Failure to manage reversing vehicle risks

HSE inspectors found failures by Cotswold Vehicle Recovery (Swindon) Limited to properly control the risk of reversing vehicles – despite this being one of the leading causes of workplace fatal injury. To manage workplace transport effectively, employers should consider the risks associated with their site and vehicles. Where workers are required to operate on foot in areas where there are moving vehicles, employers must ensure traffic routes are organised in a way that prevents collisions between pedestrians and vehicles.

HSE guidance advises implementing a one-way system for vehicle circulation to eliminate the need for reversing. Where this isn’t possible, the site should be organised to include safety measures such as protective barriers, clear markings and pedestrian crossing points. To aid a driver’s field of vision and alert pedestrians to reversing vehicles, precautionary measures such as rear-view cameras and warning alarms should also be fitted to vehicles.

Guidance on workplace transport safety is freely available on the HSE website: Workplace transport – HSE.

Cotswold Vehicle Recovery (Swindon) Limited, based at Blackworth Industrial Estate, Highworth, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The company was fined £28,000 and ordered to pay £7,276 in costs at Bristol Magistrates’ Court on 29 October 2026.

HSE Inspector Laura Artosi said:

“Almost 25 per cent of fatal workplace transport accidents in Great Britain occur while a vehicle is reversing – a stark reminder to employers to properly assess and manage this fundamental risk.

“Cotswold Vehicle Recovery (Swindon) Limited lacked a suitable traffic management system, including adequate arrangements to ensure vehicles could reverse without risks to those on foot. These failings led to an incident that has robbed Simon Pedder of much of his freedom and will likely have a lasting impact on his life.

“Had Cotswold Vehicle Recovery (Swindon) Limited implemented robust measures to allow pedestrians and vehicles to move safely across its site, this incident would not have occurred.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Karen Park and paralegal officer Michael Millman.

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: A guide to workplace transport safety – HSE and Safe manoeuvring – 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: Health and safety offences, corporate manslaughter and food safety and hygiene offences