• Worker suffered burns from a steam hose.
• HSE investigation found steam hose wasn’t safe.
• Company had no understanding of risks involved.

A chemical company has been fined £100,000 after one of its workers was permanently scarred from burns from a steam hose at a site in Motherwell.

A 23-year-old was burnt across his back and other areas of his body as he attempted to clean a process water tank on 23 October 2019. At the time he had been working for Dundas Chemical Company (Mosspark) Limited at its site at Omoa Works in Newarthill for around two years.

The company operates a large rendering plant that processes animal waste and food industry waste to produce proteins, fats and oils used in the oleo chemical, fuel, and feed industries. As a result of this process, the water tank and vickery would need occasional cleaning. The process water tank is shown in the image below:

It was during a nightshift that the man had been instructed to undertake cleaning duties on the process water tank, the vickery and the walls and floors in that area. The company provided pressure washers as well as a steam hose for cleaning down difficult areas where there may be tallow or other animal residues.

The steam hose was heavy and cumbersome to manoeuvre, with the uninsulated nozzle also becoming hot.. The man and a colleague therefore took it in turns to carry out the steam hose task.

After a period of time they stopped to have a break. While his colleague then went on to carry out other duties, the 23-year-old proceeded to finish the cleaning on his own.

He did this with the aid of a small cherry picker – attaching the steam hose to its basket. After the basket had been raised to the required height, the steam hose and nozzle spun round and steam began flowing into the cherry picker basket directly at him. He quickly turned his back to prevent his face being burned, while manipulating the nozzle of the hose away from him and lowering the basket of the cherry picker, at which point he was then able to run through to one of the deluge showers to cool his burn injuries. He was taken to hospital with steam burns to several parts of his body, which have left scars to this day.

An investigation carried out by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found the nozzle fitted to the steam hose was unsafe as it did not have a trigger or other mechanism fitted to allow the operator to start or stop the flow out of the nozzle at the point of operation. It also found that the mixing valve and set-up for supplying hot water for cleaning purposes was not maintained in an efficient working order or in good repair. Supervisors at the site were aware that the mixing valve was passing steam, however no action was taken to investigate the issue or prevent it from happening.

HSE inspectors also found the maintenance and engineering team had no sound engineering understanding of the risks involved when setting up such a washdown system and how to mitigate or control those risks. The company provided information to HSE that there were no records associated with the maintenance of the valve, hose or nozzle.

Dundas Chemical Company (Mosspark) Limited, of Mosspark, Brasswell, Dumfries, pleaded guilty to breaching section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. It was fined £100,000 at Hamilton Sheriff Court on 18 August 2025.

HSE inspector Ashley Fallis said: “Had a safe system of work been in place then this incident would not have happened.

“The lack of appropriate risk assessment, method statements, training and supervision for both the maintenance team who installed the valve, and the operators tasked with using the system, led to a situation where those involved were unaware of risks or simple control measures.

“This catalogue of failures resulted in a young man sustaining very serious burns, to which he still bears the scars to this day.

“We will not hesitate to take action against companies that fail to protect their employees.”

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.

• Six-month consultation seeks views on UK REACH technical dossier and proposed restrictions.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE), in its role as the Agency for UK REACH, today opened a six-month public consultation to gather stakeholder views on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in firefighting foams.

The opening of the UK REACH consultation links to the publication of the Annex 15 restriction report, which presents HSE’s scientific analysis and evidence base for potential restrictions on PFAS use in firefighting foams in Great Britain.

The consultation provides an opportunity for those who use foams from industry, and other stakeholders, such as trade associations, to comment on the proposals before the opinions are made and sent to the Defra Secretary of State, and the Scottish and Welsh Governments for a decision on whether to bring a restriction into law.

Dr Richard Daniels, HSE’s Director of Chemicals Regulation Division said: “HSE’s proposals have been developed through robust scientific methodology and where possible we have spoken with interested parties from across Great Britain. Now we are looking for more information from our stakeholders.

“We’re seeking evidence-based feedback on our analysis to ensure any future restrictions are proportionate, effective and tailored to Great Britain’s specific needs.”

This work takes forward the recommendation from our analysis in 2023 that PFAS in firefighting foams are prioritised for action ahead of other uses of PFAS, as firefighting foams are one of the largest sources of direct releases to the environment.

The consultation runs until 18 February 2026 and full details, including the restriction report and supporting documents, are available here. HSE has also published a Q&A document to help stakeholders understand the scope and limitations of the consultation.

Further information:

1. PFAS are persistent chemicals covering thousands of substances used across many industrial sectors
2. The consultation focuses solely on PFAS in firefighting foams and does not cover other PFAS uses or legacy contamination
3. The 2023 Regulatory Management Options Analysis, which recommended prioritising PFAS in firefighting foams for action, can be found here – Analysis of the most appropriate regulatory management options.
4. Questions outside the scope of this specific restriction report should be directed to Defra
5. HSE is Great Britain’s independent regulator for workplace health and safety. HSE also has the role as the Agency for UK REACH under the UK REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals) Regulations.

The investigation into the death of George Gilbey is now being led by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).

George, 40, was working in Shoeburyness, Essex on 27 March 2024, when he fell to his death.

The involvement of Essex Police has now concluded. HSE will now lead the criminal investigation.

HSE inspector Natalie Prince said: “We have been a part of this inquiry from the outset, and we will continue to thoroughly investigate George’s tragic death as the lead agency.

“This will aim to establish if there have been any breaches of health and safety law.

“We are in regular contact with George’s family and our thoughts remain with them at this time.”

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 releases is available.

• Power failures and control errors cause gangways to retract without warning, risking fatal falls
• Oil and gas operators to review gangway systems or stop operations
• Safety measures required before workers can safely use motion compensated gangways

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has issued a safety notice today (8 August) to highlight the risks of potentially fatal gangway accidents to offshore workers.

Serious risks have been identified where motion compensated gangways retract without warning due to power failures or control system errors. This puts workers at risk of falling from height, being struck by moving parts, or suffering serious injuries including death.

HSE is calling on operators in oil and gas, and renewable energy sectors to review their gangway arrangements. Any gangways that cannot provide sufficient warning before automatic retraction must be taken out of service until proper safety controls are installed.

Howard Harte, Operations Manager (Offshore Regulation) at the Health and Safety Executive, said: “Despite a previous safety alert in 2024, and the publication of industry good practice, we have become aware that gangways that provide insufficient warning before auto-retraction are still being used in the offshore oil and gas and renewables industry.

“This safety notice addresses continuing incidents where gangway failures have resulted in unexpected retraction without adequate warning to operators or personnel crossing between platforms. Workers have been left unable to move to safety or brace for sudden movement when systems fail.”

Under the requirements, dutyholders must conduct technical risk assessments of all automatic gangway functions. Control systems must only allow auto-retraction when personnel are confirmed safe. The use of gangway operators to manually override automatic retractions requires rigorous risk assessment.

The HSE emphasises that adequate warning systems must provide advance notice before dangerous events occur.

Howard added: “A warning by definition is advanced notice that a potentially dangerous event is about to occur. The purpose of the warning is to enable persons to make themselves safe before the event occurs. Audible and/or visual alarms that are triggered at the same time the gangway retracts are not considered to provide adequate warning to enable workers to reach safety.”

Dutyholders must review their gangway design, including the testing that has been carried out of all automatic functions. They should carry out a suitable and sufficient technical risk assessment to understand all operational states of the control system under which the gangway may auto-retract, including that the control system will only result in auto-retraction if personnel are not at risk. Use of gangway operators to override auto-retractions should be rigorously risk assessed.

The safety notice can be viewed at: https://www.hse.gov.uk/safetybulletins/motion-compensated-gangways-auto-retraction.htm

Further guidance on offshore health and safety law, risk assessment and equipment safety is available on the HSE website:

• Offshore health and safety law
• Managing risks and risk assessment at work
• Equipment and machinery safety

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. HSE issued a previous safety notice relating to the risk of serious injury from motion compensated gangways in 2024 – HSE Safety Notice ED02-2024 Risk of serious injury from motion compensated gangways.
3. Relevant legal documents:

• The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 (Application outside Great Britain) Order 2013
• The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. General duties of employers to their employeesand General duties of employers and self-employed to persons other than their employees
• The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999. Regulation 3: Risk Assessment
• The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. Regulation 4: Suitability of work equipment, Regulation 5: Maintenance, Regulation 6: Inspectionand Regulation 11: Dangerous parts of machinery
• The Work at Height Regulations 2005

• Man was able to leave care home undetected in early hours of morning.
• Search involved police, coastguard and firefighters.
• Doors at the home were not alarmed or protected.

A local authority has been fined after the death of a patient who went missing from a care home on the Isle of Barra.

Western Isles Council pled guilty to a charge under the Health and Safety at Work Act following the death of a 69-year-old man at St Brendan’s Care Home in Castlebay.

Allan MacLeod, who had been diagnosed with Dementia, had been a resident at the home – one of five operated by the council throughout the Western Isles – for around six months at the time of his death. In the early hours of 9 March 2024, he had been able to leave his bedroom without the knowledge of staff and was only found around four hours after going missing. He died a short time later in hospital.

Mr MacLeod had been placed in the home in October 2023 to allow him to be nearer a relative who stayed on Barra. In his first month at the home, staff observed him and determined patterns in his behaviour and how they could best assist him. He was able to go on regular road trips around the island with his family.

On 8 March, having been settled in bed around 9pm, hourly checks were carried out to ensure his wellbeing, but at 2am on 9 March, his bed was unoccupied, and he could not be accounted for after a search of the home.

To avoid being observed by staff, he had exited the home via the only door that was not alarmed and was ten metres from his bedroom. Police Scotland were alerted and a search initiated.

Local Coastguard, RNLI and firefighters were called out to assist in the search and at around 6am, the Coastguard helicopter detected a heat signature near the home on the patio of a residential property.

Mr MacLeod was found with facial injuries consistent with falling. He was transferred to hospital, but despite the efforts of medical staff, he died an hour later.

An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) determined that he had made several previous attempts to leave the home. Any measures that staff had taken to mitigate this, by fitting an electronic tag to his clothing that indicated his whereabouts had been defeated by Mr Macleod having removed it.

A risk assessment carried out in December 2023 indicated that Mr MacLeod would remove a tag if he located it, therefore staff required to be vigilant to this behaviour. It was only after his death that the home introduced a regime of half hourly checks on residents. Arrangements had already been made to install keypad entry systems on all doors, but this work had not been completed before Mr MacLeod’s death.

Western Isles Council, of Sandwick Road, Stornoway, pleaded guilty to breaching Sections 31 and Section 33(1)(a) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The council was fined £80,000 at Lochmaddy Sheriff Court on 6 August 2025.

HSE inspector Ashley Fallis said: “This was a tragic and preventable death.

“The council should have made sure the home had stronger measures in place with Mr MacLeod’s risks already known and assessed.

“Although changes have since been made, they came too late to prevent his death.”

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.

• Man fell from height due to lack of edge protection.
• Second time HSE action against sole trader.
• HSE guidance on working safely at height is available.

A worker suffered serious injuries after falling from a flat roof that did not have any edge protection.

A sole trader has been fined following a prosecution by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).

It was the second time Gary Smith, trading as GJ Smith Roofing, had failed to provide edge protection on a job, with HSE previously taking enforcement action against him.

Smith pleaded guilty following the incident on 15 December 2022, when a team of roofers and labourers were working on his behalf, replacing a flat roof on a house in the Luton area.

At around 11am, one of the workers was carrying large wooden boards across the roof, when he inadvertently stepped off the edge of the roof falling a distance of about 10 feet. He suffered a fractured vertebrate in his back and a broken ankle.

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 found the task had not been properly risk assessed and planned which meant that edge protection around the flat roof had not been put in place, despite it being reasonably practicable to do so.  Following HSE intervention, edge protection was installed before work re-commenced.

Gary Smith of Watling Street, Dunstable, pleaded guilty to a breach of Regulation 4(1) of the Work At Height Regulations 2005.  He was fined £2,125 and ordered to pay costs of £5,445 at a hearing at Luton & South Bedfordshire Magistrates’ Court on 29 July 2025.

Speaking after the hearing, HSE inspector Tim Nicholson said: “Clearly Mr Smith hadn’t learnt from his previous failures.

“Sadly, this latest offence resulted in a man being seriously injured.

“What makes this incident even more frustrating is the fact it could so easily have been avoided by properly planning the task and ensuring that suitable edge protection had been put in place prior to work starting.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by enforcement lawyer Julian White 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. 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 about working safely on roofs is available.

• Vulnerable man walked more than 300 steps from his room to a carpark.
• Care home staff did not notice he had left and falsified records.
• HSE guidance is available on vulnerable residents

A care home provider has been fined more than £50,000 after an elderly patient died in the early hours of Boxing Day in 2022.

Hugh Kearins, 77, had managed to leave the Chester Park Care Home in Glasgow via a series of stairways and fire doors. An inspector from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) counted 320 steps from Mr Kearins’ room to the care home’s car park just off Lambhill Street, where his body was found at around 7am.

Mr Kearins, who had dementia, had been living in a room within the Clyde Unit of the home since 2012. As part of its investigation, HSE made enquiries regarding the use of an internal fire door and was unable to obtain corroborated evidence of who was last to use the door prior to Mr Kearins, who is thought to have exited through it just before 1am. The same door was closed about an hour later by an unknown member of staff carrying out routine checks.

It was confirmed by the care home manager that once the door was noted to be insecure, the member of staff should have initiated a head count of all of the residents to ensure their safety. However, this was not carried out.

The HSE investigation found the company had failed to have a safe system of work in place. Records held by the company in relation to Mr Kearins, extensively noted the clear risk that he might abscond or ‘wander’. It was part of his care plan that he be checked or monitored every hour.

HSE guidance states that the security of doors and gates should be considered where assessment identifies that specific residents leaving the premises will present a significant risk to their safety. It adds that in some instances it may be appropriate to consider devices that alert staff of their location and whether they are at risk of harm.

A senior care assistant and a care assistant who had responsibility for Mr Kearins’ care were also found to have falsified records, stating that they had performed tasks involving him at a time when he was in fact no longer in the home. Both were unaware he was no longer in his room until news of his death became known following the discovery of his body in the car park.

The management failures in respect of the alarm door reactivation were not causative of Mr Kearins’ death and would likely not have even come to light but for four individual errors:

• The unidentified member of staff who closed the internal fire door without further action;
• The fire alarm for the internal fire door which had been deactivated
• The unidentified member of staff who left the unalarmed external fire door insecure; and
• The actions of both the senior care assistant and the care assistant.

Oakminster Healthcare Limited, of Lambhill Street, Glasgow, pleaded guilty to breaching Sections 3(1) and Section 33(1)(a) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The company was fined £53,750.

HM Inspector Amna Shah said: “This incident was completely avoidable.

“It is hugely concerning that a vulnerable man was able to walk so far and through so many doors without being noticed.

“We counted he had walked more than 300 steps.

“The fact this incident happened at Christmas time makes it all the more tragic.

“We will always take action against those who fail in their responsibilities.”

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. HSE guidance about health and safety in care homes is available.
6. Both carers were subsequently dismissed from their employment following disciplinary interviews a few days later. They are now subject to investigation by the Scottish Social Services Council.

A Herefordshire-based conservatory manufacturer and installation company has been fined £40,000 after an employee fell through the roof of a first-floor orangery home extension.

Leslie Baker was one of several employees of Atrium Conservatories Limited, working to install an orangery extension covering the footprint of a former first-floor balcony at a house in Abberley, Worcestershire on 9 February 2024.

While working on the roof trusses, Mr Baker, who was 56 at the time, stepped onto an unguarded opening for a future skylight, resulting in him falling approximately two metres to the floor below. He sustained a serious head injury, several broken ribs, a ruptured spleen and kidney damage. He remained intubated in hospital for approximately two weeks before surgery could be attempted.

The long term impact on Mr Baker has been profound both physically, as his mobility has been affected long term, and mentally as he has since been diagnosed with PTSD.

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

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

The HSE investigation also found that Atrium Conservatories Limited had failed to properly plan the work and to provide its workers with suitable instructions for carrying out their duties safely.

Atrium Conservatories Limited of Kington, Herefordshire, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. They were fined £40,000 and ordered to pay £5,309 in costs at a hearing at Kidderminster Magistrates’ Court on 26 June 2025.

HSE Inspector Jo Quigley said “Working at height remains one of the leading causes of workplace injury and death.

“This incident could have easily had fatal consequence and it 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.

“Every company that carries out building alterations must understand they are undertaking construction work; and therefore ensure they put in place suitable control and management measures throughout the duration of the work to the same standards as the wider construction industry.”

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

An airport company has been fined £144,050 for failures that led to the tragic death of a 59-year-old man.

Glasgow Prestwick Airport Limited pled guilty to a breach of health and safety legislation at Ayr Sheriff Court after Joseph Dempsey, an experienced member of the ground handling team, died when a corroded guardrail gave way and he fell to the tarmac below.

The procurator fiscal told the court the fatal incident happened at Prestwick Airport on Wednesday 11 January 2023.

The prosecutor described how Mr Dempsey was preparing to unload cargo from an aircraft using a pallet loader. He had positioned the loader and was repositioning a guardrail when it suddenly gave way and Mr Dempsey fell to the tarmac, about 10 feet below.

Mr Dempsey’s colleagues immediately went to his assistance and paramedics attempted CPR and advanced life support. These efforts proved unsuccessful and he was pronounced dead at the scene.

The Health and Safety Executive investigation found that one of the guardrail posts had completely fractured. There were visible signs of significant corrosion, discolouration and flaking white paint around the area.

Metallurgical examination of the guardrail posts found differences in chemical composition, manufacturing, and wall thickness which indicated the posts were manufactured from two different tubing sections.

These welded sections were not a feature of the manufacture’s original design and appear to have been modified while the loader was under the ownership of Prestwick Airport. The welds on both the guardrail posts contained defects which would allow moisture in, creating a corrosive environment and speeding up deterioration.

There was no record of any modification or repair to the loader guardrail involving welding and the maintenance programme in place at the time did not cover the parts of the guardrail where failure or deterioration could lead to health and safety risks.

The charge libelled by the Procurator Fiscal and accepted by the company is that they failed to ensure that the pallet loader was maintained and in good repair.

They failed to have in place a suitable and adequate maintenance and inspection programme to identify deterioration of and corrosion to the safety guardrails fitted to the container loader.

As a consequence of Prestwick Airports failure, Joseph Dempsey fell from the platform when part of a safety guardrail gave way due to corrosion and sustained severe injuries from which he died.

Since the incident, Prestwick Airport has undertaken a review of all work at height.

Checks of the guardrails on the platform loaders have been added to the list of checks conducted during the annual service and inspection schedule and the failed guardrail was replaced by a new rail from the manufacturer.

Graeme McMinn HM Principal Inspector of Health and Safety added:

“Employers have an absolute legal duty to ensure that equipment they use at work is maintained in an efficient state and in good repair and full working order.

“This incident is a tragic reminder of what can result when that does not happen.”

Glasgow Prestwick Airport Limited pled guilty to a charge contrary to Regulations 5(1) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations1998 and Section 33 (1)(c) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 at Ayr Sheriff Court on 25 June 2025. The company was fined £134,000 with a Victim Surcharge of £10,050.

Speaking after the sentencing, Debbie Carroll, who leads on health and safety investigations for the COPFS, said:

“Joseph Dempsey lost his life in circumstances which could have been avoided if Prestwick Airport had in place a suitable and adequate maintenance and inspection programme to ensure the equipment he was using was in a good state of repair.

“This prosecution should remind duty holders that a failure to fulfil their obligations can have fatal consequences and they will be held accountable for this failure.”

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.

A London property developer has been fined £40,000 after a member of the public was crushed by a faulty falling lift at a block of flats.

The 23-year-old had returned to the flats on Cambridge Heath Road in East London, with a group of friends on 9 September 2019. When he and seven others entered the lift on the ground floor, it began to shudder and descend with the doors still open. As it began to fall, the young man attempted to exit the lift but he was crushed between the ground floor and the top of the lift. The crush injuries he sustained were so serious he eventually required a liver transplant.

Nofax Enterprises Limited had been acting as the property manager for the five-storey block flats. The investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) found that it failed to act when defects with the lift were identified by a third party, resulting in a member of the public being harmed.

Health and safety law places specific obligations on those providing, controlling and using lifting equipment. HSE has detailed guidance for how to properly manage these risks. Thorough examinations should be carried out by a competent person at six month intervals for lifts designed to lift people. When a defect is identified that poses a danger to people the lifting equipment should not be used until the defect is remedied. Further guidance can be found here: Thorough examination and testing of lifts: Simple guidance for lift owners INDG339.

Nofax Enterprises Limited of Swiss House, Beckingham Street, Tolleshunt Major, Essex, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The company was fined £40,000 and ordered to pay £8,540 in costs at Southwark Crown Court on 22 July 2025.

HSE inspector Pippa Knott said: “As a result of this company’s failures, a young man who was simply returning from a night out with friends has suffered life-changing injuries.

“The fine imposed on Nofax Enterprises Limited should underline to everyone in property management that the courts, and HSE, take these failures extremely seriously.

“We will not hesitate to take action against companies which do not do all that they should to keep people safe.”

This HSE prosecution was brought by HSE enforcement lawyer Nathan Cook and paralegal officer David Shore.

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 – Thorough examination and testing of lifts: Simple guidance for lift owners INDG339
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.