• Maintenance worker killed while attempting to repair an industrial overhead door.
• HSE found company failed to maintain doors – despite two previous incidents – and lack of regular inspection had led to deterioration
• Employee killed found not to have been given suitable training to carry out high-risk repairs
• Company fined £400,000 after pleading guilty to health and safety offences.

An advertising printing company in Cardiff has been fined £400,000 after a maintenance worker suffered fatal injuries while attempting to repair an industrial overhead door.

On 5 September 2022, 59-year-old Anthony (“Tony”) Webb, an employee of GNW 2023 Realisations Limited, was carrying out maintenance work on an electrically operated sectional overhead door at the company’s manufacturing facility in Cardiff.

Mr Webb was attempting to re-tension the door springs using an industrial wrench when the tool slipped. The spring unwound in an uncontrolled manner, causing the wrench to be ejected and strike him. He suffered catastrophic injuries and died the following day.

In a victim personal statement, Tony’s wife Ewelina said:

“It is still very raw, and I feel like I am on a roller coaster. I still find it difficult to talk about Tony without breaking down crying.

“Tony and I were together 24/7. Tony liked fixing and repairing things for friends and neighbours. He was a cheeky chap, everyone loved him.

“I still meet up with Tony’s friends who are my friends also. I find it difficult when we talk about things and Tony isn’t there to experience it.

“Every day when I wake up it is like a cloud hanging over me. Some days I just cry without knowing I am going to.”

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found the company had failed to adequately maintain the electrically operated sectional overhead doors at the site despite two previous incidents involving failing doors that had injured employees.

The investigation found the company had not implemented a programme of routine inspection or preventative maintenance, allowing the doors to deteriorate into a poor condition.

HSE also found that Mr Webb had repeatedly been permitted to carry out repairs to the doors despite not being suitably trained to undertake the work. The company had failed to carry out a suitable risk assessment, establish a safe system of work, or provide appropriate tools and equipment.

HSE guidance states that powered sectional overhead doors are classed as work equipment and must comply with the requirements of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER). Equipment must be suitable for use, maintained in a safe condition and inspected by a competent person to ensure it remains safe.

Further guidance can be found here: Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER) – HSE.

GNW 2023 Realisations Limited, of Avenue Industrial Estate, Croescadarn Close, Cardiff, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and Regulation 5(1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998.

The company was fined £400,000 and ordered to pay £17,854 in costs at Merthyr Tydfil Magistrates’ Court on 17 June 2026.

HSE Inspector Georgina Bennett said:

“This incident was entirely avoidable. The maintenance of industrial doors is a high-risk activity involving stored energy within door springs;  it requires  specialist equipment and should only be carried out by people who are properly trained.

“This company failed to recognise those risks, and despite two previous incidents involving overhead doors, had not carried out regular maintenance to detect and deal with the deterioration in their condition.

“Were it not for these failures,Tony Webb’s death could have been prevented. Our thoughts remain with his loved ones as they mourn his loss.

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Alan Hughes.

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: Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER) – 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.

• Samson Containers Ltd left welders exposed to cancer-causing fumes without ventilation or protective equipment.
• Company failed to act on two separate HSE improvement notices issued in September 2024 and February 2025.
• Company also failed to provide health surveillance to monitor the hearing of their employees exposed to high levels of noise.

A Lancashire manufacturer of skips and metal containers has been fined £30,000 after repeatedly failing to protect its workers from carcinogenic welding fumes at its site in Thornton-Cleveleys.

Despite being served with an Enforcement Notice by HSE inspectors on two occasions, Samson Containers Ltd continued to carry out mild steel welding without adequate control measures to protect their employees. Inspectors also found the company failed to meet it duty to monitor the health of workers exposed to high levels of noise – risking long-term harm.

During a visit to the site on 29 August 2024, Health and Safety Executive (HSE) inspectors identified several issues including high-intensity welding without local exhaust ventilation (LEV), inadequate welfare facilities, and a lack of assessment of noise risk, along with other health and safety issues on site. Multiple improvement notices were served.

Inspectors returned on multiple occasions to assess compliance, but found that the company had done nothing to comply with the notices relating to welding fume control and health surveillance for noise. This failure left employees exposed to carcinogenic welding fumes and at risk of becoming seriously ill. The company also failed to provide health surveillance to monitor the hearing of their employees exposed to high levels of noise throughout the shift.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer advises that exposure to mild steel welding fumes can cause lung cancer and possibly kidney cancer in humans. To control the risk, suitable ventilation must be present. Where this ventilation does not adequately control exposure, respiratory protective equipment (RPE) should be provided. Welding should not be undertaken without these control measures in place. This is applicable to welding indoors and outdoors.

The Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005, Regulation 9 (1) requires employers to provide employees with health surveillance involving hearing checks where they are regularly exposed to high levels of noise or where employees are particularly at risk e.g. pre‑existing hearing loss or sensitivity to noise. Health surveillance helps employers to identify early signs of hearing damage, prevent further deterioration by prompting action, and making sure that their noise controls measures are working effectively.

The company Samson Containers Limited was found guilty at Warrington Magistrates’ Court of failing to comply with two Improvement Notices contrary to Section 33(1)(g) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. The company was fined £30,000 and ordered to pay £4571 in costs along with a victim surcharge of £2000 on 16 June 2026.

HSE Inspector Gemma Feerick said:

“This was a company that put its workers at risk of serious, long-term health conditions because it repeatedly failed to get the basics right – even when expressly served with notices to put proper controls in place.

“These fines should send a clear message that HSE takes failure to comply with enforcement notices extremely seriously and will act against companies and individuals who fail to protect the health and safety of their employees.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE Enforcement Lawyer Julian White 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. Relevant guidance can be found here:

• Safety Bulletin 15: HSE Guidance welding fume 2019 – GOV.UK
• Welding fume control
• L108: Controlling noise at work

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.

• Dangerous boiler installation led to gas leak which ‘could easily have caused an explosion’.
• Tenant in Birmingham property realised unregistered handyman Jaroslaw Mazan had lied about being on the Gas Safe Register.
• Unqualified gas work can lead to gas leaks, fires, explosions, and carbon monoxide poisoning.

A self-employed handyman has been sentenced after carrying out illegal gas work on a property in Birmingham after he falsely claimed to be on the Gas Safe Register. The work resulted in several defects, including a gas leak, which inspectors from Gas Safe Register branded an ‘immediate danger to life’.

In November 2023 Jaroslaw Mazan was hired to carry out the work by the landlords of the property.  The tenant witnessed him undertaking gas work and specifically installing the boiler, and realised that Mazan had lied about being registered with Gas Safe when they could find no evidence of this on the Gas Safe Register website.

An inspector from Gas Safe Register attended the property in December 2023 to carry out an inspection of the gas work, finding an immediately dangerous gas leak on the pipework to the boiler and several other, possibly dangerous defects.

This prompted an investigation by the Health & Safety Executive (HSE), which found that Jaroslaw Mazan carried out gas work without being competent to do so and without being registered on the Gas Safe Register.

HSE guidance states that only individuals who are on the Gas Safe Register should carry out gas work and that this work must be in accordance with appropriate standards. This guidance can be found here: Safety in the installation and use of gas systems and appliances.

While in this case nobody was injured, carrying out gas work without registration is illegal and potentially extremely dangerous. Unqualified work can lead to gas leaks, fires, explosions, and carbon monoxide poisoning.

At Dudley Magistrates’ Court on Friday 12 June, Jaroslaw Mazan pleaded guilty to breaching Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998, Regulation 3(3), Mr Mazan received a 26-week suspended sentence and was ordered to pay £500 in compensation to the tenant of the property. HSE does not determine sentences, which are set by the Court.

HSE Inspector Harry Shaw said:

“This dangerous boiler fitting was a disaster waiting to happen, and the resultant gas leak could easily have caused a lethal explosion.

“The tenant did the right thing – and quite possibly saved themselves from serious harm – by checking the Gas Safe register and alerting inspectors when they realised Jaroslaw Mazan was unregistered.

“My message to anyone getting gas work carried out is simple; always use a Gas Safe-registered engineer, and if you aren’t sure of someone’s credentials, it only takes two minutes to check.”

The HSE prosecution was brought by enforcement lawyer Matthew Reynolds 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. Relevant guidance can be found here L56 – “Safety in the installation and use of gas systems and appliances” Safety in the installation and use of gas systems and appliances
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’s foot slipped into unguarded conveyor
• HSE investigation found no suitable risk assessment in place
• SRCL Limited fined £300,150

A company providing clinical waste management services has been fined after an 18-year-old employee sustained serious injuries while loading a bin conveyor.

The young man was working for SRCL Limited at its site in Oldham on 21 November 2024, when his foot slipped into an unguarded conveyor channel. He sustained several serious fractures to his right leg.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that the company had failed to carry out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment and failed to provide suitable guarding on the bin conveyor.

HSE guidance states employers must take effective measures to prevent access to dangerous parts of machinery or to stop the movement of any dangerous parts of it before any part of a person enters a danger zone. This will normally be by fixed guarding, but where routine access is needed, other measures may be needed to stop the movement of dangerous parts, for example by having interlocked guards or pressure mats. Further detailed guidance on safe working with machinery is available.

SRCL Limited, of Indigo House, Sussex Avenue, Leeds, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The company was fined £300,150, a victim surcharge of £2000 and ordered to pay £3931.85 in costs at Warrington Magistrates’ Court on 16 June 2026.

HSE Inspector Sam Eves, said:

“A young man at the beginning of his working life was failed by this company.

“This incident could have so easily been avoided by properly assessing the risks and applying the correct control measures to prevent access to dangerous parts of machinery.

“Companies should know that HSE will not hesitate to take appropriate enforcement action against those that fall below the required standards.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE Enforcement Lawyer Gemma Zakrzewski and supported by Paralegal Officer Stephen Grabe.

More 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 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.   

• Worker suffered life-changing crush injuries to arm after being pulled into a conveyor belt.
• Contact with moving machinery is one of the most common causes of workplace fatalities in Great Britain.
• HSE investigation found that the business had failed to prevent access to dangerous parts of machinery.

A Bristol-based waste and recycling business has been fined after a worker was drawn into machinery and suffered life changing-injuries.

On 27 January 2024 a worker undertaking duties at Bateman Skips Ltd waste and recycling facility in Bristol slipped and made contact with the unguarded tail-end of a conveyor belt that was carrying waste materials.

The worker was attempting to clear a blockage that had occurred on the plant when their arm was dragged into the machine causing crush injuries that resulted in bone fractures, severe lacerations to the arm, nerve damage and a fractured rib.

In a victim personal statement, the injured worker said:

“I used to enjoy riding my bike, playing darts and snooker with my sons, working on cars and I am now unable to do any of these tasks.”

“This has been the most traumatic thing I have ever experienced both physically and mentally, and I know it will continue to affect me for the rest of my life.”

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that Bateman Skips Ltd failed to ensure the health, safety and welfare of its employees by failing to prevent access to dangerous parts of machinery and by failing to implement a safe system of work for clearing a blockages within its waste recovery facility.

HSE guidance on the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER) states that if part of a machine could present a reasonably foreseeable risk of harm, that part is considered a dangerous part of machinery.

Employers must protect their employees from dangerous parts of machinery by ensuring a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risk is undertaken and safeguarding arrangements are in place such as the installation of guards and the implementation of a system of work which includes isolation of the plant ahead of any maintenance or cleaning activity, clear instructions, training and adequate supervision. PUWER guidance is freely available on the HSE website: PUWER 1998: Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. Open learning guidance – HSE

Bateman Skips Ltd, of Broadmead Lane Industrial Estate, Bristol, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Etc. Act 1974 and breaching Regulation 11(1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998.

The company was fined £64,666 and ordered to pay £4,657 in costs at Bristol Magistrates’ Court on 5 June 2026.

HSE Inspector Laura Artosi said:

“Workers coming into contact with moving machinery is one of the most common causes of workplace fatalities in Great Britain. Quite often, this relates to poorly guarded machines and the lack of a robust health and safety management system.

“This wholly preventable incident caused this person and their family physical and emotional pain which has been affecting their lives ever since.

“Employers have a duty to create a safe and healthy work environment for their employees. In this instance, had Bateman Skips Ltd ensured guarding was installed to the tail-end of the conveyor machine and had the company implemented a safe system of work for clearing a blockage within their waste and recycling facility, this incident would not have occurred”.

This HSE prosecution was brought before the Court by HSE Enforcement Lawyer Jonathan Bambro and Paralegal Officer 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 are available.
4. Relevant guidance can be found here: Safe use of work equipment – HSE;  Machinery – 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.

• Joiner suffered a complete spinal cord injury after falling through an unsecured skylight opening.
• Principal contractor failed to properly plan, manage and monitor the roof work.
• Worker found by his son, the only other person present on site.

A mechanical and engineering construction company based in Manchester has been fined after a joiner suffered life-changing injuries when he fell through a skylight opening while carrying out work on a domestic property in Altrincham.

Adam Kirkpatrick had been subcontracted by JLM Solutions Limited to construct the timber frame for a new roof. On 22 November 2023, the 53-year-old was walking across a piece of plyboard that had been placed over roof light openings in the roof structure. The board had not been secured and gave way beneath him, causing him to fall from height.

Mr Kirkpatrick’s son was the only other person present on site at the time of the incident, after the rest of the workforce had left for the day. He called an ambulance, and Mr Kirkpatrick was taken to hospital, where he was found to have suffered multiple injuries including a head injury, fractured ribs, a fractured sternum and a complete spinal cord injury. He is now paralysed from the waist down.

He said: “I have worked in the construction industry since leaving school. I loved my job.

“I have always been able to provide for my family. Before the accident my wife had gone part time and we were making plans for retirement and spending more time with our grandchildren. This all changed due to the accident.

“It has gone from me being provider for the family to having to rely on other people.

“This accident has impacted my health. I have no feeling below my belly button, I suffer with severe nerve pain and have to self-catheter.

“Only for the NHS I wouldn’t be here today — they have saved my life.”

Mr Kirkpatrick’s wife Julie said: “On the day I was told that Adam would never walk again our world was turned upside down.

“Adam just loved to work. He lived for what he did and did it all for his family.

“It breaks my heart that Adam will never chase after his grandchildren again. He will never be able to play football with the boys or dance with his granddaughter. Everything my husband worked so hard for was to enjoy retirement and spend time with his grandchildren. That dream has been shattered since the accident.”

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that JLM Solutions Limited, acting as the principal contractor, failed to properly plan, manage and monitor the roof work. The company did not ensure suitable measures and equipment were in place to prevent or protect against falls from height and there was a lack of adequate site supervision during the work.

HSE guidance states that good management of health and safety in construction is crucial to the successful delivery of a construction project and principal contractors have an important role in managing the risks of construction work.

Principal contractors must plan, manage and monitor the construction phase and ensure subcontractors have effective preventative and protective measures in place, alongside appropriate supervision, Guidance on health and safety management in construction can be found here: Managing health and safety in construction. Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015. Guidance on regulations L153

HSE also has detailed guidance on how to plan and carry out work at height safely which highlights the important of using suitable work equipment and implementing effective control measures to prevent falls available here: Health and safety in roof work.

JLM Solutions Limited, of Elliott Street, Manchester, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 13(1) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015. The company was fined £8,000 and ordered to pay costs of £5,850 and a victim surcharge of £2,000 at Warrington Magistrates’ Court on 26 May 2026.

HSE Inspector Karen Farley said: “Falls from height remain one of the leading causes of workplace death and serious injury. The risks are well known throughout the construction industry.

“This prosecution highlights the importance of properly managing work at height activities. Had suitable control measures been implemented, such as a safe working platform combined with appropriate supervision, this incident would not have occurred and Mr Kirkpatrick would not have sustained these significant life-changing injuries.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Matthew Reynolds and 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 Work at height – 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.

• Employee suffered serious injuries after hand became trapped beneath three-tonne machine during lifting operation.
• HSE investigation found lifting operation had not been properly planned or carried out safely.
• Worker later underwent surgery to amputate two damaged fingers.

A machine manufacturing company in Shepshed, Leicestershire has been fined £170,000 after an employee’s fingers were crushed when his hand became trapped beneath a machine during a lifting operation.

An experienced machine tool fitter was working for Winbro Group Technologies Ltd at its manufacturing site in Shepshed on 17 January 2024 when his right hand became trapped beneath the foot of a three-tonne machine during a lifting operation involving a forklift truck.

The worker’s hand was underneath the machine when an unintended action caused the forklift truck’s forks to drop to the floor. The machine was lifted to release his hand and, following medical treatment, two of the worker’s damaged fingers were amputated in hospital.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that Winbro Group Technologies Ltd had failed to ensure the lifting operation involving the forklift truck was properly planned and carried out in a safe manner.

HSE guidance states that where it is not reasonably practicable to avoid people working beneath suspended loads, employers should establish safe systems of work to minimise the risk. This includes ensuring loads are properly secured. Further guidance can be found here: Planning and organising lifting operations – HSE.

Winbro Group Technologies Ltd, of Illuma House, Unit 1, Gelders Hall Road, Shepshed, Leicestershire, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 8(1) of the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998. The company was fined £170,000 and ordered to pay full prosecution costs of £7,999, along with a victim surcharge of £2,000, at Leicester Magistrates’ Court on 12 May 2026.

HSE Inspector Rebecca Whiley said:

“Every year, a significant proportion of accidents, many of them serious and sometimes fatal, occur as a result of poorly planned lifting operations.

“This was a wholly avoidable incident caused by a lack of planning. HSE will not hesitate to take action against dutyholders who fail to do all that they should to keep people safe.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by enforcement lawyer Neenu Bains 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. Relevant guidance can be found here: Planning and organising lifting operations – 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 employees developed occupational asthma after prolonged exposure to animal allergens.
• Both are now left with lifelong conditions; one was unable to continue in their role.
• HSE found the university failed to properly control the risks over a 15-year period.

Cardiff University has been fined £280,000 after two employees developed occupational asthma because of exposure to animal allergens in the workplace.

Britain’s workplace regulator, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), found that between 2008 to 2025, the university failed in its duty to identify and implement suitable controls to prevent employees’ exposure to animal allergens. Both employees affected have been left with lifelong conditions as a result, and one was unable to continue in their employment.

In a statement, one of the affected employees said:
“I was diagnosed with occupational asthma and occupational rhinitis, and my lung function has been permanently decreased by 33 percent.

“As a result, my breathing has been terrible, and I struggle walking any distance. Going upstairs is really difficult. I have to take steroid inhaler, a nasal spray and a bronchodilator throughout the day as I need it.

“I become breathless when having long conversations and I am unable to walk and talk at the same time anymore.”

HSE’s investigation found that Cardiff University had failed to put in place adequate measures to protect workers from exposure to animal allergens, despite relevant legislation being in place since 1989 under the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations (COSHH), and specific guidance relating to laboratory animal workers being available since 2011.

Occupational asthma is a recognised work-related disease that can have serious and permanent consequences. Employers working with animals or other biological agents must assess and control the risks of exposure to allergens and ensure appropriate protective measures are in place.

Cardiff University pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The university was fined £280,000 and ordered to pay £11,745in costs at Cardiff Magistrates’ Court on 30 April 2026.

After the hearing, HSE inspector Janet Hensey said:

“This was a case of Cardiff University failing to properly deal with very real risks to employees working with animals and not putting suitable controls in place to prevent exposure.

“The fact this went on for 15 years is truly concerning.

“Occupational asthma is a recognised work-related disease with potentially disabling consequences.

“HSE will not hesitate to take action against organisations, which do not do all that they can to keep people safe.”

This prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Daniel Poole and paralegal officer Helen Jacob.

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 & places and helping everyone lead safer and healthier lives.
2. More information about the legislation referred to in this case is available. Additionally, specific to this case here: The Control of Vibration at Work Regulations 2005.
3. Further details on the latest HSE news releases are available.
4. Guidance can be found here: Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) – HSE and here: Laboratory animal worker – 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 in England can be found here and those for Scotland here.

• Diving instructor used falsified medical certificate to seek employment
• Document was identified and reported by a local diving school
• HSE warns it will take action against misuse of safety-critical certification

A recreational diving instructor has been fined after falsifying a Health and Safety Executive (HSE) commercial diving medical certificate.

Stuart Elmes, of Bournemouth, falsified the certificate while seeking employment as a PADI instructor in March 2025. The document was identified by a local diving school and subsequently reported to HSE.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), supported by the Approved Medical Examiners of Divers (AMED) board, confirmed that the certificate had been falsified.

Commercial divers must hold a valid medical certificate issued by an HSE-approved doctor to confirm they are fit to dive. This is a legal requirement under the Diving at Work Regulations 1997 and is a critical safeguard to protect both the diver and others involved in diving operations.

Under Section 33(1)(m) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, it is an offence to make, or possess, a document that closely resembles an official document and is intended to deceive.

Stuart Elmes pleaded guilty to breaching Section 33(1)(m) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 at Bristol Magistrates’ Court on 17 April 2026. He was fined £700 and ordered to pay £2,620 in costs and a victim surcharge of £280.

HSE Diving inspector Christopher Booker said:

“Diving commercially is a high-risk activity. Being assessed as medically fit to work underwater, including when providing diver training, is an essential part of ensuring safety — not only for the individual but also for their students and colleagues.

“Stuart Elmes falsified an HSE diving medical certificate and used it to seek employment in the recreational diving industry.

“HSE will not hesitate to take appropriate enforcement action against those found to be in possession of, or using, falsified fitness to dive certificates.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by enforcement advocates Rowena Goodwin and Neenu Bains, supported by 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:
   Diving at Work Regulations 1997
   Commercial Diving Approved Codes of Practice
   Section 33 of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
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.

• HSE investigation found clear failings leading to two separate incidents of exposure to caustic soda at Essex-based manufacturer.
• Employee lost part of their leg in 2019 incident after stepping in puddle of caustic soda at West Thurrock site.
• In 2022 a second worker needed skin grafts after suffering burns while decanting caustic soda at Grays site.

Industrial Chemicals Limited (ICL), a chemical manufacturing company based in Essex, has been fined £3.8 million after two employees at two separate sites suffered serious chemical burns as a result of exposure to sodium hydroxide, known as caustic soda.

In the most serious incident, an employee lost his leg below the knee. In the second, another employee sustained burns requiring skin grafts to heal.

Across both sites, HSE found a consistent failure to properly assess and control the risks associated with handling and containing hazardous substances.

First incident – West Thurrock, 6 December 2019

Michael Bartholomew, now 60, a father of two and grandfather of seven from Grays in Essex, was working as a chemical loader at ICL’s site at Old Power Station, Stoneness Road, West Thurrock when he stepped into a puddle of liquid suspected to contain caustic soda. The safety boots he had been provided with were not in good condition and did not provide adequate protection against the chemical — and had not been sufficiently tested against British Standards. Mr Bartholomew sustained serious burns that resulted in his leg being amputated below the knee. He has not been able to work since.

A Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation found multiple leaks of hazardous substances from pipework, valves, hoses and vessels across the site. There was no suitable system for the inspection, maintenance and testing of pipework and equipment to prevent or reduce the likelihood of leaks in the area where Mr Bartholomew was walking. Systems of work did not account for spillages, there were inadequate controls for clearing them up, the ground around the boiler house was unmade — enabling puddles to accumulate — and there were insufficient designated or enforced walkways to direct workers safely across the site.

In a Victim Personal Statement following the amputation, Mr Bartholomew said:

“I felt that this was game over for me. I would not be able to work or support my family. I miss my work and my work colleagues.

“Losing my independence and work is a huge loss and I feel I have gone through a grieving process as my work life was such an important and integral part of my life.

“I used to go to track days and drive different cars, I cannot do any of these things anymore…I used to take my grandchildren out fishing, I used to play football with them in my back garden, I can’t do any of these things with them anymore.”

Second incident – Titan Works, Grays, 30 August 2022

At ICL’s Titan Works site on Hogg Lane, Grays (now closed), an employee was manually decanting caustic soda at 50% concentration using a hose into 25-litre containers, in order to top up intermediate bulk containers (IBCs) to the required concentration. After completing the task three times, he noticed that drips from the hose had fallen onto his foot, causing burns that later required skin grafts to heal. He has since returned to work.

The HSE investigation found there was no risk assessment or documented safe system of work for this task. Investigators also found that it would have been possible to automate the process entirely by bringing back into service an existing automatic IBC dosing plant with fixed pipework and remote controls — removing the need for manual handling of caustic soda altogether. Following the incident, the use of 25-litre containers was stopped, and IBCs were instead delivered to site already mixed to the required concentration, eliminating the risk entirely.

About caustic soda

Sodium hydroxide, also known as caustic soda, is used in the manufacture of washing and cleaning products. It is a white, odourless solid at room temperature and is strongly alkaline. It has a strong corrosive action on all body tissue, causing burns and frequently deep ulceration.

HSE guidance is clear that employers must take reasonable steps to reduce workers’ exposure to hazardous substances like caustic soda. The first priority is to prevent exposure altogether — for example, by changing how the work is done and making sure equipment and pipework are properly maintained.

If exposure can’t be avoided, it must be properly controlled using good working practices. Personal protective equipment (PPE) should only be used as a last resort and not relied on as the main way to manage the risk.

Further guidance is available in the Control of substances hazardous to health (COSHH). The Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002 (as amended). Approved Code of Practice and guidance L5

Industrial Chemicals Ltd, of Jupiter House, Warley Hill Business Park, The Drive, Brentwood, Essex, CM13 3BE, pleaded guilty to two charges of breaching Regulation 7(1) of the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002. The company was fined £3.8 million and ordered to pay costs of £124,748 at Southwark Crown Court on 21 April 2026.

HSE inspector Julia Gebauer said:

“This was a company operating with significant volumes of a highly corrosive material but had manifestly failed to put proper measures in place to protect their workers and prevent exposure.

“The consequence was two separate incidents at two separate sites – one of which resulted in life-altering injuries – that pointed to a pattern of avoidable risks that Industrial Chemicals Ltd could and should have prevented.

“That Mr Bartholomew didn’t have protective boots that were up to standard when he stepped in a puddle of caustic soda was only one of many failures that Industrial Chemicals Ltd have been held to account for.

“I hope the scale of the fine handed down brings some closure to the workers at the centre of this case and sends a clear message to employers that they must have proper plans in place to prevent their workers being exposed to danger.”

The HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer William Bodiam and paralegal officer Chidimma Elechi.

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 Control of substances hazardous to health (COSHH). The Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002 (as amended). Approved Code of Practice and guidance L5
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.