Wates Construction Ltd fined £150,000 following worker death

HSE press release: E096:04 - 7July 2004

Wates Construction Ltd (Wates) was today fined £150,000 at the Central Criminal Court, London. The case followed an investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) into the death of Mr Indergit Singh on 15 June 2000 during the redevelopment of buildings at the Woolwich Arsenal, London.

Wates had earlier pleaded guilty to breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, in that they failed to ensure that persons not in their employment were not exposed to risks to their safety. Mr Singh was working for a sub-contractor of Wates. He was working on the roof, which had on each of its four pitches a wired glass roof light that extended along the full length of the building. Mr Singh fell through one of these roof lights to the concrete floor below, a distance of approximately 11 metres. He died from his injuries four days later.

Wates was the principal contractor on the site that was being developed into the Royal Artillery Museum. Wates had received prior warnings about the danger presented by the fragile roof. Other contractors working on the roof had complained about the inadequate protection provided around the roof lights, and Wates had agreed that improvements were needed. However, they did not suspend work while these improvements were carried out, and Mr Singh fell to his death before the work was completed. Mr Singh and his work colleague did not receive a formal site induction, and no risk assessment or method statement was prepared before their work commenced.

HSE inspector Richard Boland, who led the investigation, said:

"This was an entirely avoidable death. Wates was well aware of the risks presented by working on this type of roof, and this is exactly the sort of incident that the construction industry needs to prevent if they are to improve their safety record. Falls from height still account for over half of all fatalities in construction, and the safeguards needed are straightforward and easy to put in place.

"All roofing materials should be assumed to be fragile unless it can be demonstrated otherwise. Glass, even wired glass, must be treated as being fragile because it is a brittle material likely to break if a person stands or falls on it. Ideally such material should be securely covered, but if this cannot be achieved, edge protection - such as guardrails and a toeboard - should be provided around the fragile material to prevent access to it. And, just as vital, no-one should be allowed to work on a roof until they have a clear understanding of the risks and that the necessary safeguards are in place."

Wates Construction Ltd of 1260 London Road, Croydon, South London was fined £150,000 and ordered to pay costs to HSE of £14,769.

Notes to editors

1. Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 states that: "It shall be the duty of every employer to conduct his undertaking in such a way as to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that persons not in his employment who may be affected thereby are not thereby exposed to risks to their health or safety."

2. The maximum penalty for a single offence under Section 3(1) in a Crown Court is an unlimited fine.

3. Wates pleaded guilty on Wednesday 17 March 2004 at the City of London Magistrates Court. The case was transferred to the Central Criminal Court for sentencing.

4. On 15 June 2000 Mr Indergit Singh received fatal injuries after he fell through a fragile roof. Mr Singh was engaged on work to develop buildings at the former Woolwich Arsenal site into the Royal Artillery Museum, specifically at buildings 17 and 18 that formed part of an old warehouse. Building 17 was c. 55 metres long by 25 metres wide, and was constructed two storeys high with a cast iron frame and masonry walls c. 9.3 metres high. Cast iron roof trusses supported the roof with two ridges and a valley over central columns. Each of the four pitches was split into three sections with the central part of each roof comprising roof lights made from panes of wired glass. It was this roof of building 17 on which Mr Singh set to work and fell to his death.

5. Wates was the site principal contractor; there were a number of sub contractors on that site. Before any work began a pre-tender plan was prepared for Wates. This drew contractors' attention to the fact that the roof was unsafe in several areas. The plan also stated that contractors should operate a permit to work scheme in respect of all those who would be required to work on the roof. Mr Singh was not provided with a permit to work, nor was he given a formal site safety induction. Two other contractors had raised with Wates concerns about the level of protection provided for the roof lights and the lack of edge protection on the roof. HSE's investigation revealed that Wates had failed in a number of respects to ensure safety of contractors' men while working on the roof of building 17.

6. The risk of falls through fragile roofs is well known in the construction industry. HSE publication HSG 33 'Health and Safety in Roof Work' includes guidance on working on fragile roofs. Falls from height are the most common cause of fatal injury and the second most common cause of major injury to employees, accounting for 15% of all such injuries. In 2001/2002 68 people died and nearly 4,000 suffered a serious injury as a result of a fall from height in the workplace.

7. Photographs of the roof of building 17 are available as jpegs on the HSE website photograph a, photograph b .

Press enquiries

All enquiries from journalists should be directed to the HSE Press Office