Industry News


Unregistered plumber given suspended prison sentence for illegal gas work


A


man from Essex has been given a suspended jail sentence aſter carrying out illegal gas work and breaching a Health


and Safety Executive enforcement notice. Back in April 2020, Joshua Pitman, 28, undertook


gas work at a house in South Woodham Ferrers, Essex, which included installing gas pipework. However, Mr Pitman’s installation at the house was found to not be up to current standards by a Gas Safe Registered engineer. Pitman, of Whitesmith Drive, Billericay,


Essex, pleaded guilty to breaching Section 33 of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and Regulation 3 of the Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998. He was sentenced to 16 months imprisonment,


suspended for two years, fined £22,500 and ordered to complete 200 hours of unpaid work at Chelmsford Crown Court in October 2023. He was also ordered to pay costs of £40,000 and £5,810 in compensation. Andrew Parsons, who lives in the property


with his wife Patricia Parsons, says Mr Pitman’s illegal gas work caused him and his family a great deal of distress. Mr Parsons continued: “I would urge anybody


out there who is going to employ a plumber, heating engineer, anybody who is going to be doing gas work, make sure you check the certificates, make sure you check those people are who they say they


are, that they have got all the right qualifications and that they have all the right certifications to do that work and are not putting anybody in danger.” An investigation by HSE found that Joshua


Pitman undertook illegal work while still serving a suspended jail sentence, having previously been convicted of the same offences. In October 2019, Mr Pitman was sentenced to


12 weeks in prison, suspended for two years, aſter being prosecuted by HSE. Tis HSE prosecution was in relation to illegal gas work Mr Pitman carried out in Brentwood, Essex, in November 2016, where he installed a boiler in one property and relocated a boiler at another despite not being registered with Gas Safe Register. During this prosecution, Mr Pitman was also


served with a Prohibition Notice by HSE which banned him from carrying out gas work while being unregistered. Mr Pitman breached this enforcement notice while working on Mr Parsons’ home in April 2020. Mr Pitman has never completed the required


Nationally Accredited Certification Scheme (ACS) qualifications to demonstrate he is competent to carry out gas work nor been registered with Gas Safe Register. Mr Parsons said: “Joshua Pitman did not have


a Gas Safe certificate (and this) caused a lot of disruption for myself and my family via having to put all that work right – the involvement of Cadent,


“Make sure you check the certificates, make sure you check those people are who they say they are, that they have got all the right qualifications and that they have all the right certifications to do that work and are not putting anybody in danger.” Andrew Parsons


HSE and various other contributary factors that have come in to get that fixed and therefore cost a fair amount of money, but also more importantly, put my family in danger by somebody purporting to be Gas Safe Registered and in fact not being and doing the work without those qualifications.” “Hopefully the sentences that he has got and the


compensation he is going to have to pay, will deter other people from doing similar work.”


Company fined £240,000 after Liverpool residents put at risk during removal of dangerous cladding


A health and safety inspector found combustible cladding lying on residents’ balconies at a Liverpool apartment block, posing a serious fire risk. Te cladding was similar to that used on Grenfell


Tower when the 2017 disaster occurred. Green Facades Limited had been contracted to remove the potentially dangerous aluminium composite panels and combustible insulation material from Te Circle, an eight-storey building on Henry Street in Liverpool. When an inspector from the Health and Safety


Executive (HSE) first visited the site on 10 January 2022, the inspection revealed that, in preparation for the removal work, combustible material had been leſt exposed and there were inadequate means of escaping from the scaffold which was being erected. Te situation had worsened when the inspector returned a few days later, on 21st January 2022.


Further combustible material had been exposed with no protection from potential sources of ignition, and combustible cladding material was found lying on residents’ balconies. As the building remained occupied during the works, the inspector alerted Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service who took their own enforcement action. Green Facades Limited had been subject to


earlier enforcement for similar breaches during cladding removal at a site in London. At that time the company was provided with advice on sustainable compliance with the regulations. An investigation by HSE found that Green


Facades Limited, had failed to take appropriate precautions to address the risk of fire and to ensure the safety of residents, workers, and others. It had also failed to take account of published guidance on the safe removal of cladding following the previous issue in London.


20 | HMMDecember/January 2024 | www.housingmmonline.co.uk Te company of Woolwich Road, London


pleaded guilty to breaching regulations 11(1) and 13(1) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015. AT Liverpool Magistrates’ Court the company was fined £240,000 and ordered to pay costs of £5,405. Aſter the hearing HSE inspector Jackie Western


said: “Te disturbing irony of this case is that work to protect residents from fire risk ended up making the situation more dangerous.” “Tis prosecution highlights the need for


responsible management of the removal of cladding. Te potentially tragic consequences of fire involving this type of material are well known following the Grenfell Tower fire. Despite earlier interventions and advice from HSE, and the availability of a wealth of guidance from HSE and others, this company continued to fail in its duty to address the risk of fire, putting people’s lives at risk.”


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