A housebuilder has been fined £800,000 after a teen apprentice was injured when a temporary stairwell covering collapsed.

Charlie Marsh, 17, had been working as a contractor on a Taylor Wimpey UK Limited site as it built around 450 new homes on its Meadfields site in Weston-Super-Mare.

The apprentice bricklayer, from Whitchurch in Bristol, was less than 12 months into his career when the incident happened. An investigator for the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) said the teen was lucky to escape serious injury.

On 22 August 2023 Charlie had been loading concrete blocks onto the temporary flooring on the first floor of one of the newly built homes. The blocks were being loaded into stacks of between 10 and 20, one of which was on or near to a temporary stairwell covering. This was a large area covered with a timber sheet material laid over joists – both of which would be later removed to install the staircase.

However, the area collapsed, causing Charlie and around 20kg of the concrete blocks to fall more than two metres to the ground below. He sustained injuries to his fingers, hand, wrist and shoulder.

The subsequent HSE investigation found that the joists under the timber sheet material should have been back propped. This was mentioned a number of times in Taylor Wimpey’s own health and safety manual for the site, however, it had been missed on this particular plot. Had suitably designed back propping been used, it is unlikely the incident would have occurred.

• HSE guidance (L153 – Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015) states that all practicable steps must be taken to prevent danger to any person from structural collapses and that an employer has a duty to ensure that contractors under their control should not be exposed to risks of their health or safety (Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974).

Taylor Wimpey UK Limited pleaded guilty to breaching section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The company was fined £800,000 and ordered to pay £6,240.25 costs with a £2000 victim surcharge at the North Somerset Magistrates’ Court on 3 June 2025.

HSE inspector Derek Mclauchlan said “Everyone working in construction has a responsibility to ensure people are safe.

“Any work involving structural stability is potentially high risk and proper planning and implementation should be given.

“This incident could have been avoided had the right steps been taken.

“The failures of Taylor Wimpey resulted in a young man at the very beginning of his career being injured. Charlie was lucky those injuries were not far more serious.

“Lessons should be learned.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE Enforcement Lawyer Samantha Tiger 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. Relevant guidance can be found here The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 – 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.

Ahead of Open Farm Sunday (Sunday 8 June) the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is highlighting guidance available to farmers to help them keep people safe.

As we enter the summer months, an increasing number of working farms are taking the opportunity to hold open farm events and allow members of the public to visit their farms.

Open farm events can benefit both visitors and farmers alike, but it is crucial that farmers understand the health and safety measures they should take to keep visitors safe and well.

HSE inspector Wayne Owen said: “Open farm events provide a great opportunity for the public to learn more about farming, but it must be done safely.

“Farmers choosing to hold open farm events should make sure that they comply with health and safety legislation. It is extremely important that farmers understand the risks on their farm and ensure that visitors are protected from them.

“Farms should ensure that safety risks when offering activities like trailer rides are controlled. Our guidance can help: Carrying passengers on farm trailers AIS36. However, there are also health risks from contact with the animals that also need attention and must be controlled.

“The Access to Farms industry group has produced an Industry Code of Practice (ICOP) which is available to download free from their website. Farmers should read and follow the guidance so that visitors remain safe and well on their farms. The ICOP includes a useful checklist for farmers to use.”

Key components of a well-managed open farm event include:

• Making sure the event is risk assessed and well planned.
• Ensuring that the farm and farm staff understand the risks on site, including zoonotic risk (i.e. risks from diseases or bugs carried by animals).
• Providing visitors with enough information on the risks and the controls in place (e.g. the importance of properly washing hands after touching animals, immediately before eating or drinking, and before leaving site).
• Controlling visitor access to animals.
• Supervising visitor contact with animals. Providing separate clean areas for petting of animals. Preventing visitors going into the pens with animals.
• Providing suitable facilities for washing hands (normally this will be hot and cold water, liquid soap and paper towels) and directing visitors to use them after petting animals, immediately before eating food, before and after using any play equipment, and before leaving site. Hand washing gels are not an acceptable substitute for washing facilities.
• If visitors are allowed to consume food or drink on site, providing separate clean eating areas, near hand washing facilities.
• Good prominent signage on site giving important information to visitors (but don’t rely on signage alone to give those important messages).
• Ensuring that visitors are not exposed to other risks on the farm e.g. by fencing off high risk areas or activities and keeping people away from traffic routes and moving vehicles.

By following these principles farms can hold safe and enjoyable open farm events.

Further information:

1. The Health and Safety Executive(HSE) is Britain’s national regulator for workplace health and safety. We prevent work-related death, injury and ill health through regulatory actions that range from influencing behaviours across whole industry sectors through to targeted interventions on individual businesses. These activities are supported by globally recognised scientific expertise.
2. Further details on the latest HSE news releasesis available.
3. HSE was consulted in the production of the ICOP. It provides sensible, proportionate and balanced advice to farms on how to comply with health and safety law and keep visitors safe and well.

A college in Nantwich that specialises in outdoor-based careers has been fined £40,000 after a student’s fingers were severed when his hand came into contact with a mitre saw.

Aaron Maguire, from Crewe, was a second year Horticulture student at Reaseheath College when his hand came into contact with the blade of the saw on 20 September 2023. He had been using the saw to cut a piece of wood along its length when the wood twisted and pulled his hand into the cutting disc of the saw.

This resulted in the then 17-year old cutting through several fingers and the thumb on his left hand. Following an eight hour operation, surgeons managed to successfully re-attach Aaron’s thumb and index finger, but the middle finger could not be saved.

Keen hockey player Aaron, who is now 19, said everyday tasks were now more difficult.

“Although my left hand is not my dominant hand, I have had to adjust to doing things that I would normally do with my left hand, such as cutting food and picking up everyday objects like glasses and cups,” he said.

“I cannot grip things properly and it makes it difficult to do the hobbies I did.

“Prior to the incident, I was a keen hockey player. I still try to play hockey now, but it is nowhere near the level I was playing at before I had my injury.”

More than 18 months on, Aaron has been told that he requires further surgery to his middle finger, which he hopes won’t affect his plans to go to university in September.

“There are a number of reasons why an operation needs to take place.

“One of them is because the bone in my index finger is gradually sliding down and pushing into the skin on my hand.

“The operation is due to take place later this year. If the timing of the operation occurs around September when I am due to start my university course, this will have a significant impact on my studies.”

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that the college failed to adequately risk assess or produce a written safe system of work for using the mitre saw. The college did not record what training and instruction was given to students on the use of the saw.

There was no process to determine whether supervision was needed, nor was there any refresher training for using the saw following the students’ return from their summer break.

On the day of the incident, Aaron had been seen by the tutor earlier that morning using the saw improperly. Despite this, he was allowed to use the saw again later that day without supervision.

HSE guidance states that a suitable and sufficient risk assessment should be carried out to identify measures that can be taken to overcome the risks that the hazard presents. It also states that young people warrant special consideration due to their judgement and lack of experience.

Employers need to satisfy themselves that in addition to being adequately trained, users can demonstrate competence, and the level of supervision should be directly related to the level of competence. (Further guidance can be found here: Safe use of woodworking machinery. Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 as applied to woodworking machinery. Approved Code of Practice and guidance L114.

Reaseheath College in Nantwich, pleaded guilty to Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. The college was fined £40,000 and ordered to pay £6,106 in costs at Chester Magistrates’ Court on 4 June 2025.

HSE inspector Summer Foster said: “Places of education and workplaces must ensure that they have properly assessed the risks where young people are using dangerous machinery.

“If suitable training, an assessment of competence and appropriate supervision had been carried out then this accident would not have been able to happen.

“A young man has been left with life-changing injuries as a result.”

The HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Edward Parton and paralegal officer Jason Dix.

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 Safe use of woodworking machinery. Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 as applied to woodworking machinery. Approved Code of Practice and guidance L114.
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 guidance says all work at height must be properly planned

A construction company and its director have been fined after a worker fell through the roof of a sheep barn.

Jack Croft, 30, suffered life changing injuries after the incident in Leyburn, North Yorkshire.

He was working for Norman Iveson Steel Products, as part of a project to extend the sheep barn. Roof sheets needed to be installed, bridging the gap between the old roof and new. Jack, from Bedale, was carrying out the work on 11 October 2022 when he stepped onto a fragile roof light which immediately broke under his weight. He fell from a height of around six metres.

Mr. Croft suffered significant life changing injuries, including five cranial fractures, 10 fractured ribs, a cranial bleed, hearing loss and fractures to his spine, eye socket, cheek, wrist and shoulder. He also suffered a collapsed left lung and a pulmonary embolism.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found the company had failed to implement basic working at height control measures, such as safety netting, to prevent falls from height in this area. The netting that was in place on site did not cover full work areas and was installed by persons without the sufficient skills to rig it. HSE also found a failure to plan, manage and monitor the construction phase, to ensure it was carried out in a safe manner.

HSE has a range of guidance on how to plan and carry out work at height safely: Construction – Work at height – HSE

Norman Iveson Steel Products Limited, of Hill Crest, North Yorkshire, pleaded guilty to Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The company was fined £100,000 and ordered to pay costs of £6,101 at York Magistrates Court on 22 May 2025.

Phillip Iveson, a director of the company, pleaded guilty to Section 37 of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 194 and fined £1,822 and told to pay costs of £2,358.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Gavin Carruthers, said: “This was a tragic incident where a young man narrowly escaped death but received life changing injuries. Falls from height continue to be the leading cause of workplace death in Great Britain and this incident was fully avoidable if steps were taken to address the risks.”

This prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Karen Park 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. Relevant guidance can be found here – Construction – Work at height
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 multi-national company has been fined £26,000 after a radiographer was overexposed to ionising radiation.

The 69-year-old man had been working for Mistras Group Limited at its former site in Hartlepool in December 2020, when the company was notified by their approved dosimetry service that he had received a dose in excess of legal limits.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) was also notified, with the regulator prosecuting the company following its investigation.

• Ionising radiation has many uses in industry, such as energy production, manufacturing, medicine and research. It gives many benefits to society. However, it is important the risks of ionising radiation are managed sensibly to protect workers and the public.

The incident happened when a gamma emitting radioactive source used for radiography had not returned to its shielded container. Due to poor compliance with the company’s own radiation safety protocols this was not identified promptly, resulting in a radiation overexposure to the radiographer.

No symptoms were reported, however excessive exposure to ionising radiation can increase the potential of developing certain cancers.

The HSE investigation found that pre-use safety checks had not been completed and recorded by the radiographer. These are key stages in confirming that radiography systems are operating correctly and ensuring the safe use of equipment.

Alarming Electronic Personal Dosemeters (EPD’s) and radiation monitors had been provided by the company but were not being used by the radiographer. If they had been, their alarm would have gone off highlighting the presence of radiation and allowed the radiographer to retreat to a safe location. Radiation incidents had not been reported correctly.

The investigation also found there had been a number of failings made by the company to ensure employees were following its rules and procedures for radiation protection. Instructions within their local rules had not been followed and supervision had not been sufficient to identify the lack of compliance. The company had received previous enforcement by HSE for similar failings.

• The practice of industrial radiography falls under the Ionising Radiations Regulations 2017.
• Due to the high radiation doses associated with this form of non-destructive testing, companies must adopt routine working practices capable of keeping radiation exposures of employees as low as reasonably practicable.
• Guidance on what needs to be considered and what is required can be found in the Approved Code of Practice & Guidance L121: Work with Ionising Radiation, the Ionising Radiations Regulations 2017 (ACoP). There is also a HSE information sheet Industrial radiography – managing radiation risks Ionising Radiation Protection Series No. 1(rev 2 -2018).

Mistras Group Limited, of Norman Way, Cambridge, pleaded guilty to breaching the Ionising Radiations Regulations 2017, Regulation 12(1) and Regulation 9(1). The company was fined £26,000 and ordered to pay £11,353 in costs at Newton Aycliffe Magistrates’ Court on 22 May 2025.

HSE specialist inspector for radiation Elizabeth Reeves said: “Industrial radiography is a hazardous practice if not managed properly.

“Radiation protection is an area where employers and employees must not become complacent with. Safety checks and the use of monitoring equipment such as EPD’s and radiation monitors are essential elements to ensuring the safe operation of equipment and protection to personnel.

“This prosecution demonstrates that the courts, and HSE, take failure to comply with the regulations extremely seriously.”

This prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Jonathan Bambro and paralegal officer Rebecca Forman.

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/radiation/ionising/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.

• HSE inspectors left stunned by employee concerns
• HSE guidance on artificial stone dust recently updated

A company that manufactures popular stone kitchen worktops has been fined £60,000 after it repeatedly failed to protect workers from exposure to hazardous dust.

Inspectors from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) visited Inova Stone Ltd nine times over a six year period, and found little or no improvement across several areas of concern.

HSE inspectors were left stunned after visiting the company’s premises in Slough in May 2021 when employees told them that ‘no-one is in charge of health and safety’. That visit had come about after concerns had been raised about unsafe working practices. Inspectors soon saw the complacency for themselves, after identifying several breaches of health and safety law, including a failure to control exposure to respirable crystalline silica (RCS).

The workshop floor was caked in dust, suggesting an absence of effective controls.

Stone worktops are becoming increasingly popular in home kitchens. Processing stone, including engineered stone, by cutting, chiselling and polishing, can create dust that contains airborne particle that carry RCS.

RCS dust is invisibly fine and can reach deep inside the lung. It can cause permanent lung damage before symptoms develop. Stone workers are at risk of exposure to airborne particles of stone dust containing RCS, with the risk higher when exposure is prolonged and uncontrolled. Over time, breathing in these silica particles can cause irreversible, life-changing and often fatal respiratory conditions such as silicosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and lung cancer.

• HSE recently updated its guidance for those working on stone worktops – including a helpful guide of do’s and don’ts here: HSE Guidance for those installing stone worktops.

As well as failing to protect workers from the potentially deadly dust, HSE inspectors also found Inova Stone Ltd routinely allowed them to use unguarded machinery. In addition, the company also had heavy stone slabs not being stored safely, putting workers at risk of serious injury.      

As a result of the inspection, the company was served with four improvement notices, with the resulting HSE investigation revealing similar action had also been taken four years earlier, in 2017.

Inova Stone Ltd of Willow Road, Colnbrook, Slough, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act, as well as three charges for failure to comply with an improvement notice. The company was fined £60,000 and ordered to pay £7,363 costs at Staines Magistrates Court on 20 May 2025.

After the hearing, HSE Principal Inspector Karen Morris said: “Inova Stone Ltd failed to comply with legal notices requiring them to make improvements and repeatedly showed a lack of commitment to managing health and safety.

“We were stunned when employees told us that ‘no-one was in charge of health and safety’.

“After being provided with advice and guidance over several years, the company had plenty of opportunities to comply with the law, yet they consistently failed to do so.

“The fine imposed should send a clear message to employers that the risks from working with engineered stone must be taken extremely seriously.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyers Jayne Wilson and Rebecca Schwartz as well as paralegal Melissa Wardle.

Further information:

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

• Working at height a leading cause of workplace injury and death, HSE guidance is available.

Two Shrewsbury-based companies have been fined after a worker fell through a roof during extension work on a house extension the town.

The injured man was one of several workers employed by Roofrite (Shropshire) Limited carrying out work on the roof of the property on 9 December 2022. The firm had been appointed by principal contractor Harding and Houlston Building Contractors Limited to install the roof on the property.

While working on the roof, the man accidently stepped in an area where there was an opening for a window that was yet to be installed, resulting in him falling through and to the ground below. He suffered fractures to his spine and ribs.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that external scaffold had been put into place around the perimeter of the extension to allow workers access to the roof. However, there were no measures in place internally to prevent falls into the extension and to the ground below.

• Working at height remains one of the leading causes of workplace injury and death and HSE has detailed guidance on working safely at height.

The HSE investigation also found that Roofrite (Shropshire) Limited had failed to properly plan the work and to provide its workers with suitable instructions for carrying out their duties safely. Harding and Houlston Building Contractors Limited had also failed to ensure that the roof work had been properly planned, and failed to carry out any monitoring of the work that was being completed by the roofers on the site, which was under its control.

Roofrite (Shropshire) Limited of Atcham Business Park, Shrewsbury, Shropshire, pleaded guilty to breaching three charges of Regulation 6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and were fined £8,000 and order to pay costs of £2,990 at a hearing at Kidderminster Magistrates’ Court on 19 May 2025.

Harding and Houlston Building Contractors Limited of Emstrey House North, Shrewsbury Business Park, Shrewsbury, Shropshire, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 13(1) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 and were fined £500 and order to pay costs of £2,990 at the same hearing.

HSE inspector Sara Andrews said “Working at height remains one of the leading causes of workplace injury and death.

“This incident highlights the importance of undertaking a thorough assessment of the risks for all work at height activities. Suitable control measures, such as internal crash deck, should also be implemented to minimise the risk of serious personal injury.

“All principal contractors must ensure such control measures are in place throughout the duration of the work.”

This prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Nathan Cook 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. 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 and Wales can be found here and for those in Scotland here.
5. HSE guidance on working safely at height is available.

• Workshop caked in dust when HSE inspected
• Guidance is available to prevent excessive exposure

A wood supplier has been fined £40,000 for failing to protect its workers from exposure to wood dust.

Fakenham-based Nat Pal Limited was visited by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) in April 2023. Dust was found scattered across the floor, and the inspection identified failings in the company’s control measures to prevent exposure of their employees to wood dust and enforcement action was taken.

The HSE investigation also identified ongoing failings in the company’s control measures and found that it had failed to take appropriate precautions despite previous enforcement on the same issues dating back to 2015.

Breathing in wood dust excessively can cause asthma and nasal cancer. Guidance on working in the woodworking industry is available and an inspection-led campaign to protect workers continues.

That guidance states that employers must take effective measures to prevent exposure of their employees to wood dust. This will normally be by:

• Providing and maintaining local exhaust ventilation systems;
• Having appropriate face-fit tested respiratory protection.
• Carrying out health surveillance to monitor the respiratory health of employees.

Nat Pal Limited of Cummings Road, Tattersett Business Park, Fakenham, pleaded guilty to a charge contrary to Section 2 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act, 1974, in that it failed to ensure, so far as was reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of its employees, as it failed to manage the risks created by operating a wood-working business. The company was fined £40,000 and ordered to pay costs of £4,072 at a hearing at Norwich Magistrates’ Court on 16 May 2025.

After the hearing, HSE inspector Natalie Prince said “The fine imposed on Nat Pal Limited should underline that HSE take a failure to protect the health of employees extremely seriously.

“To make matters worse, this company had been visited previously and had failed to take steps to protect its workers.

“We will not hesitate to take action against companies which fail to do all they can.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Rebecca Schwartz and paralegal officer Imogen Isaac.

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 guidance on working in the woodworking industryis available.
5. HSE does not pass sentences, set guidelines or collect any fines imposed. Relevant sentencing guidelines must be followed unless the court is satisfied that it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so.  The sentencing guidelines for health and safety offences can be found here.

A manufacturing company has been fined £20,000 after a worker lost part of his finger in machinery at its site in St Helens.

The man was injured at Film & Foil Solutions Ltd, which makes flexible film used in the food industry, on 4 December 2023.

He was using a machine that converts and folds plastic film at the company’s site on Haydock Industrial Estate. He tried to stop the material becoming tangled by using his hand to stop the poorly guarded rotating shaft. However, in doing so, his right index finger made contact with a rotating part of the machine and became entangled.

He was taken to hospital and due to the seriousness of the injuries, surgery was carried out the following day to amputate part of the finger on his dominant right hand. In a statement provided to HSE, the employee, who doesn’t wish to be named, described the impact of the injuries.

He said: “I was unable to carry out normal daily tasks such as tying my shoelaces.

“My right hand is my dominant hand and I find it extremely difficult to write with that hand now.

“I am now self-conscious when I go outside.

“My family have also been affected by the injury as I am unable to do normal things I used to be able to do before.

“As a result of the injury I feel my job prospects have been affected, both now and in the future.”

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that Film & Foil Solutions Ltd failed to protect its employees, including ensuring the machinery being used to produce it had suitable guarding. The company had failed to carry out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment, resulting in a failure to provide suitable guarding arrangements on the machine and had failed to put in place an adequate safe system of work. It also revealed inconsistencies and inadequacies in the provision of information, instruction and training for those required to use the machine.

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, pressure mats and electro-sensitive protective equipment (ESPE). Further detailed guidance on safe working with machinery is available.

Film & Foil Solutions Ltd, of North Florida Road, Haydock Industrial

Estate, Haydock, St. Helens, Merseyside, pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 11(1) of The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. The company was fined £20,000 and ordered to pay £2,932 in costs at Sefton Magistrates’ Court on 15 May 2025.

HSE inspector Sam Eves said “This incident could so easily have been avoided had the company taken simple steps to guard dangerous parts of machinery and implement safe working practices.

“Companies and individuals should be aware 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 Matthew Reynolds and supported by Paralegal Officer Imogen Isaac.

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. detailed guidance on safe working with machinery is available.
5. HSE does not pass sentences, set guidelines or collect any fines imposed. Relevant sentencing guidelines must be followed unless the court is satisfied that it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so.  The sentencing guidelines for health and safety offences can be found here.

• Both workers “fortunate to be alive”, says HSE lawyer
• HSE guidance available on working from height and safe handling of baggage
• Specific guidance on airside safety management available from Civil Aviation Authority

British Airways has been fined more than £3million after two employees fell from height and sustained serious injuries.

The airline was prosecuted by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) following two separate incidents at Terminal 5 at Heathrow Airport.

On 25 August 2022, a 54 -year-old employee had been unloading baggage containers from an aircraft when he slipped off a televator and landed 1.5 metres onto the ground below. He suffered serious back and head injuries, including a fractured vertebrae, as a result.

The HSE investigation found there were gaps between the televator’s guardrails and the aircraft fuselage, the size of which depended on the type of aircraft, creating the fall from height hazard. The gaps increased in size after the front of the televators’ platforms at Terminal 5 were extended – but additional measures to prevent falls from height had not been implemented.

At the time of the incident, British Airways had started a programme to retrofit extendable guardrails to televators in response to previous HSE visits. This was completed following the incident.

In the second incident a British Airways worker sustained head injuries, including a fractured jaw and bleeding on the brain, on 8 March 2023, while unloading baggage containers from an aircraft following its arrival from Seattle. The 43-year-old fell from an elevator and landed three metres onto the ground below.

Both employees were taken to hospital for treatment and had to take several months off work.

The HSE investigation into this incident identified a risk of employees falling from height from the front of the elevator platforms when they were being used during loading and unloading of some aircraft types. Flaps on either side of the platform would be left folded down leaving a gap between the platform and aircraft fuselage.

It also found that the elevator’s operator platform had not been fully extended towards the aircraft, creating a gap which employees could fall through.

Falls from height remain one of the leading causes of workplace injury and death. HSE has detailed guidance on working safely at height while the Civil Aviation Authority has guidance with input from HSE on ground handling activities, including aircraft loading, on its website.

British Airways PLC, of Waterside, Speedbird Way, Harmondsworth, Greater London, pleaded guilty to two charges under Regulation 6(3) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005.

The company was fined £1.33million in relation to the August 2022 incident, and £1.875million in relation to the March 2023 incident. The company was also ordered to pay £20,935 in costs at Southwark Crown Court on 15 May 2025.

HSE enforcement lawyer Rebecca Schwartz, who brought the prosecution, said:

“Falls from height present a real risk of death or serious, life-changing injury. Both employees are fortunate to be alive today.

“The risks of working at height and the necessary control measures are well established – in these cases adequate guardrails would have significantly reduced the risk of harm. This was a reasonably foreseeable risk that British Airways should have been aware of and therefore it should have done more to protect its employees.”

Moving baggage between an aircraft and the luggage carousel in the terminal building is dynamic and time-pressured. It therefore comes with a range of risks to baggage handlers. Several HSE inspections have taken place at Heathrow Airport, identifying risks with manual handling and maintenance of equipment as well as falls from height. Airlines and ground handling companies have needed to take action as a result of these visits. HSE guidance is available here.

This HSE prosecution was supported by HSE paralegal officer Melissa Wardle.

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. 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 and Wales can be found here and for those in Scotland here.