NEWSFLASH IN THE COURTS


REAL-LIFE ‘TOWER OF TERROR’ ENDS IN £100K


PENALTY A lift company has been ordered to pay £100,000 in fines and costs after terrified tourists were left with broken legs and ankles when a Tower Bridge lift fell several metres into a service pit because a vital mechanism failed.


Four people sustained bone fractures in the incident at the popular London landmark on 11th May 2009. A further six were treated for shock.


The lift car they were travelling in was ascending to the Tower Bridge Exhibition when it suddenly fell down the shaft from a distance of approximately three metres.


MOLTEN METAL FIRE LANDS


TATA IN COURT Global steel giant Tata has been prosecuted after three employees suffered serious burns when tonnes of molten metal spilled onto the factory floor and ignited.


Swansea Crown Court heard that trainee crane driver Kelvin Watts and two colleagues escaped from the top of a crane and over the boom when a huge ladle dislodged spilling the molten metal, which then caught fire, at Tata Strip Products in Port Talbot on 2nd April 2013.


Mr Watts, 50, from Port Talbot, had picked up some 300 tonnes of molten metal using an overhead crane and had asked for confirmation that one of the hooks was properly on the ladle as the crane’s camera system was not working.


When he was alerted by the plant control room that the hook was not fully attached, he stopped the crane


10


and put it into reverse. But the ladle dislodged, spilling the load onto the floor. Moments later, fire broke out and reached the cab of the crane, resulting in burns to the three men as they tried to escape to safety.


Mr Watts suffered severe burns on his head and forearms and spent several days in hospital. He has suffered repeated infections in the


The company responsible for maintaining and servicing the lift, Temple Lifts Ltd, was sentenced following a complex technical investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), supported by the Health and Safety Laboratory (HSL).


The investigation revealed that there had been a number of historic component failures in the counterweight mechanism on two separate lifts at the attraction prior to the catastrophic failure. However, these components had simply been replaced without a proper review and investigation as to why they were failing early.


HSE concluded that the uncontrolled fall could have been avoided had more in-depth analysis occurred, and that the fact this had not happened was indicative of wider failings.


Temple Lifts Ltd, of Baring Lane, London, SE12, was fined £50,000 and ordered to pay £50,000 in costs after pleading guilty to two charges covered by Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.


burns since and has been unable to return to work.


His two colleagues, also from Port Talbot, were less severely burnt and although they are back at Tata, neither can face driving the cranes or entering the area where the incident occurred.


Following a Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation, the court was told the crane’s camera system had not been operating properly for some time. Although it had been reported on near-miss forms and pre- use checks, it had still not been fixed. The lighting, which employees stated was poor, cut out completely during the incident, as did the control systems.


Tata has since installed a new camera system, improved lighting, and managers now scrutinise all pre-use checks. If the camera system fails, spotters are put in place to ensure crane hooks are properly latched onto ladle handles.


Tata Steel Ltd, of Millbank, London, was fined £200,000 and ordered to pay costs of £11,190 after pleading guilty to a breach of Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.


www.tomorrowshs.com


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56