• Three-year-old girl found unconscious during swimming pool free-play session.
• Child became trapped beneath large float during holiday camp activity.
• HSE investigation found inadequate safety documentation and communication.

A company that runs holiday camps for children across the country has been fined £6,000 after a three-year-old girl nearly drowned during a swimming pool free-play session.

The incident occurred on 26 July 2023 at Bishopsgate School in Egham, Surrey, where Oxford Active Ltd was running a holiday camp. The three-year-old girl was found face down in the swimming pool underneath a large float and was not breathing. Staff intervened and were able to resuscitate her.

The girl was part of a group of 19 children aged between three and five who were taking part in a free-play swimming session. Most of the children were non-swimmers, including the three-year-old. Staff had fitted her with two sets of armbands and provided her with a foam noodle before she entered the pool. A number of floats were present in the pool, including a large rocket-shaped float, beneath which the child became trapped. When she was found unconscious, she was no longer wearing the armbands or using the noodle.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that Oxford Active Ltd’s documentation relating to pool safety and supervision was insufficiently detailed and lacked clarity. The investigation also found that the content of this documentation was not communicated effectively to staff, meaning appropriate control measures were not properly understood or implemented.

HSE guidance on swimming pool management highlights the importance of effective supervision arrangements, particularly where young or non-swimming children are involved. This includes ensuring suitable adult-to-child ratios, clear rules on the use of floats and inflatable equipment, robust risk assessments for free-play sessions, and effective emergency procedures so incidents can be identified and responded to immediately.

Oxford Active Ltd, of Oxford, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The company was fined £6,000 and ordered to pay £12,000 in costs at a hearing at Chichester Crown Court.

After the hearing, HSE Inspector Russell Beckett said:

“It is vital that children are able to learn to swim in a safe environment and that parents can trust their children will be properly looked after while doing so.

“Fortunately, the three-year-old child recovered well, but this incident could very easily have had a tragic outcome.”

This HSE prosecution was brought be enforcement lawyer, Neenu Bains 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. Relevant guidance can be found here: Swimming pool management: Leisure activities
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.

A global chemicals company has been fined £400,000 after a worker narrowly escaped serious injury in a high-pressure steam release incident at its site in Huddersfield.

Syngenta Ltd was sentenced after the 59-year-old contractor – working under its control and direction – had been carrying out unsafe maintenance work. The man had been working as a mechanical fitter on 6 November 2023 when the incident took place, resulting in the company reporting it to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) as a dangerous occurrence. The incident involved a release of high-pressure steam as he went about his job.

The company operates a large agrichemicals production site where some of the production plants rely on high pressure steam to manufacture products. The HSE investigation found that the incident occurred during the planned replacement of a faulty steam trap on small-bore pipework.

Steam traps are devices that automatically remove condensate (water) and air from the high-pressure steam system. There was a sudden failure of the valve used to isolate the work location from the steam, and this resulted in the uncontrolled high-pressure release.

The HSE investigation also revealed several failures with the system of work in operation. These included:

• The isolation valve failed when the mechanical fitter was separating a bolted flange by cutting the bolts using a battery powered reciprocating saw.
• The isolation valve and flange bolts were affected by corrosion and were in a poor condition.
• Due to widespread corrosion of flange bolts on the steam distribution system, it was considered necessary to routinely cut bolts rather than unscrew them using a spanner.
• Cutting flange bolts reduces the ability to control any unexpected, trapped material or pressure remaining in the pipework.

Syngenta Ltd pleaded guilty to having failed to ensure that the isolation valve and flange bolts were maintained in an efficient state, in efficient working order and in good repair – as required by Regulation 5(1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER) – HSE.

In addition, there was an issue with the company’s documented risk assessment procedure in place before such maintenance work was undertaken. It was routine for Syngenta to carry out maintenance work on small-bore pipework of the high-pressure steam distribution system, using a single method of isolation.

HSE’s published guidance about on this subject (The safe isolation of plant and equipment – HSE, HSG253) emphasizes that using a method of double isolation is safer. The risk assessment documents in place failed to appreciate the increased risk involved in relying on a single method of isolation when there was known corrosion of the work equipment. Syngenta Ltd also pleaded guilty to having failed to make a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risk involved in carrying out the specific maintenance work described as required by Regulation 3(1) of the The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.

Syngenta Ltd, whose head office is at Bracknell, Berkshire pleaded guilty to the two offences at Leeds Magistrates’ Court on 28 January 2026 and was fined £400,000 and ordered to pay costs of £8,288.

HSE Inspector David Welsh said: “If a safe system of work had been in place at the site when the maintenance was being carried out, this dangerous incident would not have happened.

“The company did not appreciate the extent of the risk posed because of the way the maintenance work was being done, and the relatively simple control measures that could have been applied to make it safer.

“Syngenta not only failed produce an appropriate risk assessment, but also failed  to maintain work equipment in a safe condition – which taken together meant that this was a dangerous accident waiting to happen.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by 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 is available.
4. Relevant guidance can be found here: The safe isolation of plant and equipment – 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 suffered life-changing injuries after falling through fragile rooflight.
• HSE investigation found no measures in place to prevent or mitigate a fall.
• Incident highlights ongoing risks of working at height in construction.

Daniel Jenner, trading as Jenner Roofing and Building Services, has received an eight-month suspended sentence after a worker fell four metres through a rooflight to the concrete floor below.

The incident occurred on 12 August 2023, when a worker was carrying out work on behalf of Jenner Roofing and Building Services, at an industrial estate in High Wycombe, working alone to clean and repair gutters and drains.

While walking next to the unguarded edges of the roof, he approached a fragile roof covering above a service road. He stepped onto a rooflight, fell through it, and sustained serious, life-changing injuries including a fractured skull and cheekbone, a fractured leg and a broken wrist.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that Daniel Jenner had failed to implement any work-at-height measures to prevent workers from falling from the unguarded edges of the roof or through the fragile roof itself. There were no measures in place to mitigate for either the distance or the impact of a fall.

Working at height remains one of the leading causes of workplace injury and death. HSE has detailed guidance available on working safely at height and managing construction activities that can be found on our website.

Daniel Jenner, trading as Jenner Roofing and Building Services, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. He received an eight-month suspended sentence, was ordered to complete 280 hours of unpaid work and to pay £500 in costs at a hearing at High Wycombe Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday 21 January 2026.

HSE Lead Inspector, Sophie Neale, said:

“This was a tragic but avoidable incident, where an individual suffered life-changing injuries due to working at height. Had suitable control measures been implemented, such as fall prevention or fall mitigation measures, this incident would not have occurred.

“This prosecution highlights ongoing safety failures in the construction industry, where working at height remains one of the leading causes of workplace injury and death.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer, Gemma Zakrzewski and paralegal officer, Helen Hugo.

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.

• Worker fatally injured after becoming entangled in unguarded machinery.
• HSE investigation found failure to prevent access to dangerous moving parts.
• Company could have implemented recognised industry safety measures.

A South Yorkshire wire company has been sentenced following serious health and safety breaches that resulted in the death of one its workers.

David Lockwood, 45, sustained fatal injuries at Stanley Wire Limited’s site on Talbot Road in Penistone on 18 November 2021.

Sheffield Magistrates’ Court heard how Mr Lockwood died after becoming entangled in an unguarded wire drawing and recoiling machine. The machine, known as a ‘Gravity Block’, had exposed moving parts which the worker was able to access.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that the company had failed to take effective measures to prevent employees from accessing dangerous moving parts of the wire drawing machine. The investigation identified that the company should have carried out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment for the machine, and subsequently developed a safe system of work and clearly communicated this to its workforce.

HSE also found that fixed closed guards, interlocks or pressure mats should have been installed to prevent operatives from entering the Gravity Block while it was rotating. The company could have appointed a designated competent person on site and provided formal training to operatives, rather than relying on verbal instruction.

Recognised industry-standard safety measures could and should have been implemented on a number of machines, instead of allowing substandard conditions to persist over a prolonged period.

HSE has detailed guidance on the safe use of work equipment and machinery guarding, including the requirements under the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER), which is available at: Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER) – HSE

Stanley Wire Limited, of Stanley Mills, Talbot Road, Penistone, South Yorkshire, after pleading guilty at an early hearing of breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. The company was fined £140,000 and ordered to pay £6,652 in costs at Sheffield Magistrates’ Court on 22 January.

After the hearing, HSE Inspector Charlotte Bligh said:

“Following the incident, eight Prohibition Notices were served on the company. The remedial action taken demonstrated that appropriate measures, such as effective guarding, were readily available and could have been put in place had the risks associated with the activity been properly considered.

“Companies are reminded that HSE will not hesitate to take appropriate enforcement action against those that fall below the required health and safety standards.”

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: Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER) – HSE
5. HSE does not pass sentences, set guidelines or collect any fines imposed.

• Unsafe work spotted by inspectors from HSE.
• Site manager refused to co-operate and made threats of violence.
• Inspectors had to return to site with police officers.

A builder who threatened inspectors from Britain’s workplace regulator and told them his name was James Bond has been fined.

David Robert Lane, 59, was the site manager of an extensive cottage refurbishment in Staffordshire when unsafe work caught the attention of two inspectors from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). The pair had been carrying out routine inspections in the Rugeley area on 11 February 2025 when they saw two people on the site accessing a roof from the bucket of an excavator.

Clearly identifying the practice to be unsafe, the inspectors decided they had to stop and take action.

There were around ten workers on the site and when the inspectors approached, Lane, who would later be identified as the site manager, came over to intervene. He refused to identify himself, except as James Bond, and rebuffed their attempts to inspect the site. He went on to tell the inspectors he was in fact the property owner, that the men on site were unpaid friends and relatives, and that they had no legal right to inspect. He followed that up with threats of violence, at which point the inspectors withdrew.

The two inspectors returned to the site a week later, accompanied by officers from Staffordshire Police. Site manager Lane greeted them with a shout of “It’s PC Plod!” while still refusing to identify himself. He maintained that he was the owner, told all his staff not to speak to HSE, except to confirm that they were his relatives and not at work, and told the inspectors once again that they had no right to inspect and to leave the site.

After making several enquiries, the inspectors were able to identify Lane as the site manager – this resulted in him being served with enforcement action.

Upon receiving notification that he was to be prosecuted for the offence of obstruction, under 2 counts of section 33(1)(h) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, he responded with three expletive laden emails, and said “I won’t jump through your hoops”.

HSE defines work-related violence as ‘any incident in which a person is abused, threatened or assaulted in circumstances relating to their work’. This can include verbal abuse or threats, including face to face, online and via telephone and physical attacks. It can include violence from members of the public, customers, clients, patients, service users and students towards a person at work.

David Robert Lane, of Talbot Street, Rugeley, Staffordshire, failed to attend Birmingham Magistrates Court on two occasions, and on the latter was found guilty after being tried in his absence on 9 January. He was fined £3,000, ordered to pay full costs of £6,450 and must pay a victim surcharge of £1,200.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Gareth Langston said: “This case highlights the difficulties we face in trying to improve the health and safety of workers across Great Britain.

“HSE inspectors have an important job to do, in safeguarding the health, safety and welfare of people at work. This includes investigating incidents and securing justice for innocent workers and the families that are tragically left behind.

“We conduct more than 13,000 inspections every year and it is through this proactive engagement that we are able to advise employers on how they can improve their ways of working, we only take enforcement action when the circumstances require it.

“We accept that not all employers will be pleased to see us, but the vast majority are professional and accept us with good grace.

“HSE will not tolerate the obstruction of its inspectors, and may prosecute offenders in rare cases such as this, where this is necessary.”

This HSE prosecution was brought be enforcement lawyer Edward Parton 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. 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.

Derbyshire Police has been fined £60,000 after several of its officers were injured when a riot training exercise went wrong.

Four serving police officers suffered burns after petrol bombs were thrown at them during the simulated exercise at a training facility in Rotherham on 2 February 2021.

An investigation into the incident by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that the officers had been exposed to significant and avoidable risks during the exercise.

Officers wearing flame-retardant personal protective equipment (PPE) had been required to face petrol bombs thrown by other officers as part of a training drill intended to replicate a public disorder situation.

However, it resulted in four of the 13 officers taking part sustaining burns to their lower bodies, three of whom required hospital treatment. All four have since returned to work, but the incident resulted in permanent scarring, and psychological harm which will have a lasting effect.

The HSE investigation found that Derbyshire Constabulary had failed to properly plan and risk assess the exercise. Key failings included:

• Failing to give officers adequate information on the lifespan, care, and inspection of the flame retardant PPE to ensure it provided adequate protection.
• Failing to carry out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment for both the production and deployment of petrol bombs during the training.
• Failing to implement safe systems of work to control the foreseeable risks created in the course of petrol reception training.

Derbyshire Constabulary of Butterley Hall, Ripley, Derby, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. They were fined £60,000 and ordered to pay £9,470 in costs at Sheffield Magistrates Court on 19 January 2026

After the hearing, HSE Inspector Jennifer Elsegood, said: “Being a serving police officer is a job that carries with it levels of risk, however while preparing officers for dangerous situations is important, it must never come at the expense of their safety.

“High‑risk training activities must be planned and controlled with the same care and professionalism expected in any other workplace.

“The risks created by the training should have been identified as part of the Constabulary’s risk assessments and appropriately controlled.

“We hope this case reinforces the importance of thorough risk assessment, robust equipment assurance, and safeguarding those who put themselves forward to protect the public.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by senior enforcement lawyer Robert James and paralegal officer Rebecca Withell.

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.

• NHS Trust fined £40,000 after several employees developed serious and irreversible hand-arm vibration-related conditions.
• The court heard how failures to assess and control vibration exposure left staff at risk of lifelong ill health.
• One long-serving employee described losing her career, independence and financial security as a result.

An NHS Trust has been fined £40,000 after several employees were diagnosed with Hand Arm Vibration Syndrome (HAVS) and Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS), following prolonged exposure to vibration from work equipment.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) began an investigation into Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust after an employee was diagnosed with HAVS – a serious, lifelong condition characterised by persistent numbness and tingling in the fingers, reduced sensory perception and impaired manual dexterity.

The investigation found the Trust failed to carry out a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks posed by the use of vibrating tools. There were no records to demonstrate the level of vibration exposure employees faced, and the Trust also failed to eliminate exposure or reduce it to as low as reasonably practicable.

Furthermore, it became clear that employees had not been provided with suitable and sufficient information, instruction or training about the risks associated with vibration exposure.

HSE also identified that the Trust had failed to report that two other employees had been diagnosed with HAVS and that one employee had been diagnosed with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS).

One affected employee, Sally Elliott, who worked in the plaster-cast department for more than 25 years, described how she was never warned about the risks of vibration exposure.

“I never, for one minute, suspected that the issues I was experiencing were being caused by the tools I used in my workplace,” she said.

“I was never given any information on the risks of HAVS and I knew nothing about the potential symptoms.”

She went on to explain how her symptoms gradually worsened, affecting both her work and everyday life:

“Every aspect of daily life is impacted due to the numbness, weakness, pins-and-needles in my fingers and hands. From getting up to going to bed anything that I need to do with my hands is affected.”

After being diagnosed with advanced stage 3 vascular and sensorineural HAVS, she was no longer able to continue in her role and has remained off work since October 2023.

“I gave my all to Chesterfield Royal Hospital and enjoyed my job,” she added.

“I took seriously my duty of care to patients, and I feel the Trust failed in their duty of care to me. I feel let down and I am suffering the consequences through no fault of my own.”

The HSE investigation concluded that Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust failed to properly assess the risks associated with hand-arm vibration and failed to adequately control employees’ exposure.

HSE guidance clearly sets out the measures employers must take to assess and control vibration risks. Exposure should be eliminated where reasonably practicable or otherwise reduced to as low as reasonably practicable. Further guidance is available on the HSE website found here: Advice for employers: Overview – HSE

Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, of Chesterfield Road, Calow, Chesterfield, Derbyshire, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The Trust was fined £40,000 and ordered to pay full prosecution costs of £4,911 at Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court on 12 January 2026

HSE Inspector Muir Finlay said: “The fine imposed on the Trust should underline to all employers that expose their workers to vibration that the courts and HSE take failures to follow the regulations extremely seriously.

“HSE will not hesitate to take action against those that do not do all that they should to keep people safe and healthy at work.”

The HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Samantha Crockett 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.
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 inspection found poor control of metalworking fluids on CNC machines.
• Workers were put at risk of ill-health including dermatitis, asthma and other respiratory conditions.
• The firm failed to comply with Improvement Notices issued by HSE inspectors.

An engineering firm in Bedfordshire has been fined £27,200 after poor management of safety put employees at risk of ill-health including dermatitis, asthma and other respiratory conditions.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) prosecution was the result of a routine inspection in July 2022. HSE inspectors. identified a number of concerns which were brought to the company’s attention, specifically on the use of metalworking fluids in CNC machines.

This led to HSE inspectors serving formal Improvement Notices, which required the company to prepare a suitable risk assessment for the activities, and to have appropriate testing and monitoring arrangements in place.

When HSE conducted a follow-up inspection it found that, despite the requirements of the Improvement Notices, the company had failed to undertake a suitable assessment. Documentation still failed to identify hazards and potential health effects, did not consider measures necessary to reduce the risk of inhalation of metalworking fluid mist, and did not consider or implement suitable arrangements to maintain metalworking fluid quality. Inspectors also found that testing of fluids remained less frequent than recommended in guidance. The company had not complied with the Improvement Notices, and a prosecution was commenced in January 2024.

HSE guidance states that employers must maintain fluid quality and control bacterial contamination of fluids, minimise skin exposure to fluids, prevent or control airborne mists and, where there is exposure to fluid or mist, carry out appropriate health surveillance. Further guidance on Metalworking fluids – HSE can be found on HSE’s website.

Tracel Ltd, trading as The Engineering Quest, of Sand Road Industrial Estate, Great Gransden, Sandy, Bedfordshire, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 6 of the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations and to two charges of breaching Section 21 of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. District Judge Sally Fudge fined the company £27,200 and ordered to pay £30,000 in costs at Luton Magistrates’ Court on 8 January 2026.

HSE Inspector Stephen Manley said:
“We are committed to maintaining Great Britain’s record as one of the safest countries to work in, and our inspection activity is central to delivering this.  “This case was entirely avoidable had the company taken appropriate action following our inspection, and I hope it encourages others to review their arrangements.

“Poor management of the use of metalworking fluids still leads to workers developing lung diseases and dermatitis. Employers must consider how these fluids are used and take steps to reduce and control exposure.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE senior enforcement lawyer Jon Mack 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 is available.
4. Relevant guidance can be found at Metalworking fluids – 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.

• A Cumbria-based packaging manufacturer has been fined after workers were exposed to dangerous hydrogen sulphide gas.
• One employee subsequently died after collapsing in a pump room at the company’s Wigton site in December 2021.
• The HSE investigation found failures to adequately assess and control the risk of gas build-up in site drainage systems.

A Cumbria-based producer of cellulose film packaging has been fined £200,000 after workers were exposed to harmful hydrogen sulphide gas.

On 24 December 2021, Futamura Chemical UK Ltd employee, Alexander Cole (known as Alec), was found collapsed in a pump room after exposure to gas at the company’s factory premises in Wigton, Cumbria. Delivery driver, Robert Dyer, attempted to assist Mr Cole but was also overcome by the gas. Both men were rescued from the area and Mr Dyer quickly regained consciousness. Tragically, Mr Cole died in hospital the following day, which was Christmas Day. A subsequent inquest concluded that, on the balance of probabilities, hydrogen sulphide had contributed to Mr Cole’s death.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that Futamura Chemical (UK) Ltd failed to adequately risk assess its production process, as it did not identify that hydrogen sulphide gas, a by-product of the process, was able to enter the site’s water effluent system.

The court heard that Futamura Chemical UK Ltd had conducted a risk assessment for the presence of hydrogen sulphide in the production area and implemented control measures. However, there was inadequate assessment and associated risk controls relating to the potential for hydrogen sulphide build-up in the site’s drainage system. This meant there was a risk that the gas could be released from the drains, putting people at risk of exposure.

Hydrogen sulphide is a clear gas with the smell of rotten eggs and is known to be harmful to health. Depending on the concentration of the gas and the length of time exposed, symptoms can range from dizziness, loss of consciousness and eye irritation through to death.

HSE guidance states that employers must adequately risk assess and implement sufficient controls to reduce a person’s exposure to substances harmful to health to a level as low as is reasonably practicable. Further guidance on Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) can be found on HSE’s website.

Futamura Chemical UK Ltd, of Station Road, Wigton, Cumbria, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) and Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The company was fined £200,000 and ordered to pay £20,000 in costs at Warrington Magistrates’ Court on 6 January 2026.

After the hearing Inspector, Matthew Shepherd, said: “This tragic case shows the importance of conducting a thorough and robust risk assessment to ensure that all risks are properly identified and managed. Where companies use, or produce within their processes, substances harmful to health, it is vital that they have fully considered and controlled all pathways to exposure. Failure to do so can have terrible consequences.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer, Karen Park 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: https://www.hse.gov.uk/coshh/index.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.

• 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 – [email protected]

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