23.01.2010

Telehandler tip costs $7,000

A telehandler accident that injured an employee has cost a UK contractor nearly £7,000 in fines and costs.

Meldrum Construction Services has been fined £4,500 and ordered to pay costs of £2,342.20 plus a victim surcharge of £15, following an accident at a site at Holly Hall, Sandhoe, near Corbridge, in Northumberland, on 16th July 2008.

The Birtley, Gateshead based contractor pleaded guilty to breaching section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 at Tynedale Magistrates' Court in Hexham last week.

Tom Lincoln, 39, of Dudley, Northumberland, was using a telehandler to lift roof trusses onto the roof of the development. The accident happened after the trusses, which had been held in place with a canvas strap, were unloaded and the strap left hanging from the boom.

In order to avoid the strap snagging on scaffolding, Lincoln extended and raised the boom, causing the telehandler which was set up on sloping ground, to tip sideways, throwing Lincoln against the machine's window and controls when it came to rest.

Lincoln was not trained to operate the telehandler and was not wearing a seat belt at the time of the accident. He suffered multiple fractures to his right arm, leaving him with limited mobility in his shoulder. He still requires medical treatment and is unable to return to his job.

Health & Safety Executive construction inspector John McGill, said: "Mr Lincoln has suffered long term injuries as a result of this serious incident. Meldrum Construction Services failed to ensure that he had the necessary training to use the machine and had not reviewed its processes to ensure that unauthorised personnel did not have access to specialist machinery on site."

"While the company had produced a risk assessment and a system of work for lifting the roof trusses, neither were sufficient and they failed to identify the dangers that workers would face. This incident demonstrates how important it is for construction companies to effectively manage health and safety at all levels within the business."

Following the incident, the company changed its working procedures to make sure that only trained staff were able to access and operate site machinery.

The sentence was lighter than it might have been due to the fact that the company had no previous convictions, had carried out a risk assessment and since the accident has put a system in place that assigns trained drivers to a numbered machine.