<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>RM Risk Management</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2011 06:42:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>£245,000 fines after asbestos case</title>
		<link>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/asbestos-training/245000-fines-after-asbestos-case/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/asbestos-training/245000-fines-after-asbestos-case/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2011 06:42:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Asbestos consultancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Asbestos training]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/?p=1104</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Nuneaton company and its officers were fined a total of £245,000 at Birmingham Crown Court in relation to the …]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A Nuneaton company and its officers were fined a total of £245,000 at Birmingham Crown Court in relation to the removal of asbestos, following an investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE).</p>
<p>Dalebrick Ltd was contracted to carry out clearing and stripping works on the premises on New John Street West, Birmingham, before they could be converted by a development company. Dalebrick hired a team of temporary workers to work on the site, without warning them of the asbestos risk. Five people were hired, aged between 16 and 26, to do the work, as well as a foreman. The youngest worker had just finished his GCSE examinations. After almost five weeks the team walked off site. A second team was then hired, comprising four men and the same foreman. This team was on site for two days before an HSE inspector, who was contacted by one of the original team, inspected the site and ordered the work to stop</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/asbestos-training/245000-fines-after-asbestos-case/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Private Landlords pay out £27,500 for breaking fire safety rules</title>
		<link>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/fire-safety-training/private-landlords-pay-out-27500-for-breaking-fire-safety-rules/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/fire-safety-training/private-landlords-pay-out-27500-for-breaking-fire-safety-rules/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2011 06:36:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Fire Alarm Tests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fire safety consultancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fire safety training]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/?p=1101</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two private landlords have been ordered to pay a combined total of £27,500 in fines and costs after they were …]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two private landlords have been ordered to pay a combined total of £27,500 in fines and costs after they were found guilty of breaching fire safety laws at a house in Hatfield.</p>
<p>In Watford Magistrates Court recently, landlords Audrey Feegrado and Fiaz Mahmmud pleaded guilty to five violations of the Housing (Management of Houses in Multiple Occupation) Regulations 2006.</p>
<p>Amongst others, the fire safety breaches included:</p>
<p>• Not maintaining fire alarms and fire fighting equipment in good working order<br />
• Failing to keep means of escape free from obstruction<br />
• Failing to take steps to protect residents from injury</p>
<p>Commenting on the case, the chief executive of Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council, Michel Saminaden, said:</p>
<blockquote><p>“These severe breaches of fire safety regulations could have resulted in fatalities. It is something that this council, as the responsible authority for private sector housing, takes very seriously and we are working hard to ensure that high standards are maintained to ensure the safety of our residents.”</p></blockquote>
<p>The pair were fined £11,500 each, as well as being ordered to pay £2,225 each in court costs. Had the landlords undergone even a basic fire safety awareness course, this massive payout could have been avoided.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/fire-safety-training/private-landlords-pay-out-27500-for-breaking-fire-safety-rules/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Legionnaires&#8217; link to Corfu holiday</title>
		<link>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/water-hygiene-management/legionnaires-link-to-corfu-holiday/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/water-hygiene-management/legionnaires-link-to-corfu-holiday/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Oct 2011 08:15:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Hygiene]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Water Hygiene Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Water Outlet Temperature Tests]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/?p=1097</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There have been nine cases of Legionnaires&#8217; disease in the UK, all linked to travel to Corfu since August, according …]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There have been nine cases of Legionnaires&#8217; disease in the UK, all linked to travel to Corfu since August, according to the Health Protection Agency.</p>
<p>However, the HPA cannot rule out a UK source of the infections and is still investigating.</p>
<p>It is advising people to be aware of the symptoms of Legionnaires&#8217; disease if they are going to the Greek island.</p>
<p>The illness can lead to severe pneumonia and is sometimes fatal.</p>
<p>Symptoms can take up to two weeks to develop after infection and generally start as a &#8220;flu-like&#8221; illness. It can be treated with antibiotics.</p>
<p>The bacteria which cause the disease cannot be spread from person to person. They can live in water so cooling systems, showers and taps are common sources of infection.</p>
<p>Prof Nick Phin, from the Legionnaires&#8217; disease department at the HPA, said: &#8220;We are concerned that UK residents travelling to Corfu should be aware of this potential risk, however we are not suggesting that people change their holiday plans.</p>
<p>&#8220;We are continuing our investigations so we that can provide the best advice for travellers and minimise the risk of further cases.</p>
<p>&#8220;We will also assist the Greek Public Health authorities in their investigations into a possible source or sources within Corfu.&#8221;</p>
<p>GPs in the UK are also being told to keep an eye out for patients with the symptoms of Legionnaires&#8217; disease</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/water-hygiene-management/legionnaires-link-to-corfu-holiday/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>M+S fined over 1 million</title>
		<link>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/asbestos-training/ms-fined-over-1-million/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/asbestos-training/ms-fined-over-1-million/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2011 08:35:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Asbestos consultancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Asbestos training]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/?p=1094</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
Marks and Spencer has been fined £1million for failing to protect customers, staff and workers from potential exposure to asbestos …]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>
<h2>Marks and Spencer has been fined £1million for failing to protect customers, staff and workers from potential exposure to asbestos during refurbishment at one of its stores in Reading.</h2>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/asbestos-training/ms-fined-over-1-million/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Asbestos fine for Norfolk firm</title>
		<link>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/asbestos-training/asbestos-fine-for-norfolk-firm/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/asbestos-training/asbestos-fine-for-norfolk-firm/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011 15:33:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Asbestos consultancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Asbestos training]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/?p=1091</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The inability to safely manage asbestos removal work at a renovation site in Great Yarmouth has resulted in a Norfolk …]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The inability to safely manage asbestos removal work at a renovation site in Great Yarmouth has resulted in a Norfolk firm and a Manchester contractor being fined £2,500 and £1,000 respectively.</p>
<p>Hunstanton firm Azam Bros Ltd was fined after admitting breaching Regulation 4 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006. It was also ordered to pay £2,500 in costs.</p>
<p>Mohammed Zahid, 33, from Wilbraham Road, Manchester, admitted breaching regulations 5, 8(2), 10 and 16 of the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2006. Along with the fine, it was ordered to pay costs of £500.</p>
<p>Mr Zahid was hired by Azam Bros Ltd in May 2009 to remove damage caused by a fire at two of their commercial units in Regent Street in Great Yarmouth.</p>
<p>The Health and Safety Executive was called in to investigate after Great Yarmouth Borough Council received complaints that a skip being used to clear the debris was not covered to prevent dust exposure to the public.</p>
<p>Norwich Magistrates Court heard that Mr Zahid failed to order an asbestos survey, as required by law, before the removal work began. He was also not trained or licensed to remove the material.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/asbestos-training/asbestos-fine-for-norfolk-firm/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Death of worker leads to fines</title>
		<link>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/working-at-height-regulations/death-of-worker-leads-to-fines/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/working-at-height-regulations/death-of-worker-leads-to-fines/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Jul 2011 08:24:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Working at Height Regulations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/?p=1088</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two firms have been ordered to pay nearly £50,000 after a worker fell through a rooflight and died.
Carl Pearson was …]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two firms have been ordered to pay nearly £50,000 after a worker fell through a rooflight and died.</p>
<p>Carl Pearson was working on the roof of the building on Wharfdale Road in Bournemouth in 2007 when the accident happened.</p>
<p>The 42-year-old was taken to hospital but died the next day from his injuries.</p>
<p>Cladcoat UK Ltd, who contracted the father-of-two to replace damaged rooflights on the building, admitted breaching health and safety laws at Southampton Crown Court.</p>
<p>The firm was contracted by TRN Electrical Ltd to carry out the work, who also admitted health and safety breaches at the court.</p>
<p>Cladcoat UK Ltd, of 168 Ringwood Road, Longham, was fined £10,000 with no costs, while TRN Electrical Ltd was ordered to pay £30,000 and costs of £14,850.</p>
<p>The director of Cladcoat Ltd Jeremy Walton, of Tarrant Keyneston, Blandford Forum, was handed a conditional discharge after admitting breaching Sections 3(1) and 37 of the Act.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/working-at-height-regulations/death-of-worker-leads-to-fines/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Firm fined after truck falls on man</title>
		<link>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/consultancy/hs-audits/firm-fined-after-truck-falls-on-man/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/consultancy/hs-audits/firm-fined-after-truck-falls-on-man/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Jul 2011 08:22:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[H&S Audits]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/?p=1086</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An accident in Nottingham which left a worker with long-term impaired vision when a truck fell on him has seen …]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An accident in Nottingham which left a worker with long-term impaired vision when a truck fell on him has seen his employer fined £8,000.</p>
<p>The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) brought a prosecution against Revelholme Marketing Ltd (trading as Unic International) over the incident near the firm&#8217;s premises in Colwick Road, Nottingham, on 23 January 2009.</p>
<p>Nottingham Magistrates&#8217; Court heard that the employer, who wishes not to be named, fractured his cheekbone and suffered multiple skull injuries and impaired vision after the powered industrial truck used to lift and transport materials toppled onto him. As a result, the man spent 10 days in hospital and was unable to return to work for almost three months.</p>
<p>Revelholme, which produces solvent degreasers and cleaning products, was fined £5,000 and ordered to pay costs of £18,000 after it was found guilty of breaching Regulation 4(3) of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/consultancy/hs-audits/firm-fined-after-truck-falls-on-man/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Workmen injured in 15ft plunge</title>
		<link>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/working-at-height-regulations/workmen-injured-in-15ft-plunge/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/working-at-height-regulations/workmen-injured-in-15ft-plunge/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Jul 2011 08:21:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Working at Height Regulations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/?p=1084</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two workmen were injured after they fell more than 15ft while refurbishing a store in west London, a court has …]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two workmen were injured after they fell more than 15ft while refurbishing a store in west London, a court has heard.</p>
<p>Bridgford Interiors Ltd admitted health and safety breaches at the Old Bailey over the incident at a TX Maxx outlet in September 2006.</p>
<p>The men were using concrete to fill in a gap in the first floor of the store in Hounslow, which was left after they had removed some stairs and an escalator. During this activity the support holding up their working platform gave way.</p>
<p>The pair were taken to hospital after plunging more than 15ft to the floor below.</p>
<p>One worker was found to have suffered a dislocated shoulder and the other a fractured pelvis and elbow.</p>
<p>The interior design firm, of Fradley Park, Litchfield, Staffordshire, was fined £25,000 and ordered to pay costs of £23,292.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/working-at-height-regulations/workmen-injured-in-15ft-plunge/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Roofer &#8216;worked without supports&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/working-at-height-regulations/roofer-worked-without-supports/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/working-at-height-regulations/roofer-worked-without-supports/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2011 13:11:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[H&S Audits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Working at Height Regulations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/?p=1081</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A roofer has been fined after one of his workers was spotted power-washing the roof of a semi-detached house without …]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A roofer has been fined after one of his workers was spotted power-washing the roof of a semi-detached house without anything to secure him against slipping off.</p>
<p>Arthur Boswell, of Middlewich, trading under the name AB Tile Protection, was taken to court by health and safety chiefs for failing to make sure safety equipment was in place to stop workers being hurt.</p>
<p>A Health and Safety Executive inspector visited a house on Welch Road, Hyde, after a member of the public made a complaint, Trafford magistrates heard.</p>
<p>The inspector saw a man on the ridge of the roof, more than 20ft off the ground, using a power washer to remove moss and other detritus from the roof. The inspector issued an immediate prohibition notice on the work taking place.</p>
<p>Boswell, of Moston, Middlewich, admitted breaching health and safety regulations and was fined £2,060. He was also made liable for £3,275 in costs</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/working-at-height-regulations/roofer-worked-without-supports/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>£4,000 for building breaches landlord who also broke fire regulations</title>
		<link>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/fire-safety-training/4000-for-building-breaches-landlord-who-also-broke-fire-regulations/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/fire-safety-training/4000-for-building-breaches-landlord-who-also-broke-fire-regulations/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2011 13:10:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Fire Alarm Tests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fire Engineering]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fire Extinguisher]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fire extinguisher servicing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fire safety consultancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fire safety training]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/?p=1079</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A landlord found guilty of breaching the Building Act 1984 had also failed to comply with a number of fire …]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A landlord found guilty of breaching the Building Act 1984 had also failed to comply with a number of fire safety regulations.</p>
<p>Javid Iqbal had converted the upstairs of a public house into flats without applying for consent.</p>
<p>Appearing at Peterborough Magistrates’ Court on 19 April, he was fined £3,350 and ordered to pay £899 in costs as well as a £15 victim surcharge.</p>
<p>While he pleaded guilty to the offence under section 35 of the Building Act, several breaches of the Fire Safety Order 2005 were also taken into consideration in sentencing.</p>
<p>Mr Iqbal had failed to fit the flats above the Windmill Pub, in Peterborough, with fire doors and adequate smoke alarms. There were also inadequate means of escape and emergency lighting.</p>
<p>The breaches came to light following a serious blaze at the property in September last year.</p>
<p>An electrical fire that started on the ground floor spread, trapping an adult and a baby upstairs. Firefighters managed to rescue the pair, while four people had already managed to escape. All received medical attention, with three people taken to hospital.</p>
<p>Thanks to Info4fire</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/fire-safety-training/4000-for-building-breaches-landlord-who-also-broke-fire-regulations/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Worker &#8216;fell 10ft through roof&#8217;</title>
		<link>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/working-at-height-regulations/worker-fell-10ft-through-roof/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/working-at-height-regulations/worker-fell-10ft-through-roof/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2011 13:09:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[H&S Audits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Working at Height Regulations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/?p=1077</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Kent builder has been fined after an employee fell more than 10ft through a garage roof.
Fifty-three-year-old Anthony Murphy suffered …]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A Kent builder has been fined after an employee fell more than 10ft through a garage roof.</p>
<p>Fifty-three-year-old Anthony Murphy suffered two broken ribs and a fractured sternum in the fall, which happened in Knotts Yard, Whitstable, Kent, as he helped contractor Hugh Pattison remove vegetation from the roof of a block of garages.</p>
<p>He suffered life-threatening internal injuries, and broke several bones in his back so badly they could not be repaired with plates. Hugh Pattison, 44, was subsequently charged with inadequate planning over the incident last February.</p>
<p>Health and safety chiefs found there was no edge protection to prevent workers from falling, while the platforms they worked on were inadequate for the job in hand.</p>
<p>Pattison, of Willesborough, Ashford, Kent, was fined £800 after he admitted breaching the Health and Safety at Work Act, and was also ordered to pay a further £200 in costs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/working-at-height-regulations/worker-fell-10ft-through-roof/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Landlord pays out nearly £8,000 for fire safety failings at flats</title>
		<link>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/fire-safety-training/landlord-pays-out-nearly-8000-for-fire-safety-failings-at-flats/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/fire-safety-training/landlord-pays-out-nearly-8000-for-fire-safety-failings-at-flats/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2011 13:08:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Fire Alarm Tests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fire Engineering]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fire Extinguisher]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fire safety consultancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fire safety training]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/?p=1075</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A landlord of a block of flats has pleaded guilty to five contraventions of the Fire Safety Order (2005).
Appearing at …]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A landlord of a block of flats has pleaded guilty to five contraventions of the Fire Safety Order (2005).</p>
<p>Appearing at York Crown Court for sentencing on 17 May following a hearing last month at Scarborough magistrates court, Ewan McFerren was ordered to pay £5,500 in fines and £2,400 in costs.</p>
<p>The breaches came to light following a serious fire at 14 New Queen Street, in Scarborough.</p>
<p>Fire investigators found he had failed to take general fire precautions and that there was an inadequate fire risk assessment, as well as a lack of fully functioning fire alarm and fire detection system. There was also a failure to maintain general fire provisions and a serious and imminent danger to tenants due to a lack of information about fire safety procedures, the court heard.</p>
<p>Karen Galloway, prosecuting, said: “The fire and rescue service’s decision to prosecute was not taken lightly and this measure is only taken in the most serious cases. The responsible person is always in a position of authority; their lack of actions should have been foreseeable to prevent, in the event of fire, persons being put at risk of death or injury.</p>
<p>“The contraventions in this case were serious and would have continued had the fire authority and Scarborough Borough Council not acted immediately by serving a prohibition notice on the responsible person.” </p>
<p>The fire, on 25 May 2010, started on the ground floor flat at the property. Occupants of the remaining four flats were only made aware of the fire by passersby shouting up at the windows, according to Richard Hanley, North Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service station manager.<br />
 <br />
“The majority of business premises that we visit under our audit schedule are well-managed; however, we continue to find buildings where the legislation does apply, which do not have adequate fire risk assessments or fire safety provisions, said Mr Hanley. &#8221;The conviction of Mr McFerren on this matter shows how seriously the fire authority and the courts view those who put the safety of others at risk in the event of a fire.”</p>
<p>Thanks to Info4fire</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/fire-safety-training/landlord-pays-out-nearly-8000-for-fire-safety-failings-at-flats/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Firm fined over fatal hotel blaze</title>
		<link>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/fire-safety-training/firm-fined-over-fatal-hotel-blaze/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/fire-safety-training/firm-fined-over-fatal-hotel-blaze/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 May 2011 06:53:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Fire safety consultancy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fire safety training]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/?p=1073</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A firm has been fined £80,000 following a blaze at a Cornwall hotel in which three people were killed.
The fire …]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A firm has been fined £80,000 following a blaze at a Cornwall hotel in which three people were killed.</p>
<p>The fire at the Penhallow Hotel, Newquay, in 2007 was described by firefighters at the time as the worst hotel fire in Britain for 40 years.</p>
<p>O&amp;C Holdsworth, which is responsible for a chain of hotels in southern England, had failed to ensure fire detectors and alarms were working at the hotel, Truro Crown Court heard. The court was told that the company had been warned about inadequate equipment more than a year before the fire.</p>
<p>Monica Hughes, 86, her 43-year-old son Peter, and 80-year-old Joan Harper were unable to escape the blaze. Mr Hughes, a teacher from Cheslyn Hay, Staffordshire, jumped from a third-floor window after trying in vain to save his mother. Ms Harper, of Stoke-on-Trent, was also trapped, while her twin sister Marjorie Brys was one of more than 90 people who escaped the four-storey hotel.</p>
<p>O&amp;C Holdsworth placed the blame on the hotel manager and a health and safety specialist who it said had failed to pass the warning to directors.</p>
<p>Passing sentence, Judge Paul Darlow said the company was not responsible for the fire and it was impossible to say whether lives would have been saved had the safety systems been up to scratch. However, he said there had been a &#8220;systemic failure&#8221; by the firm to make sure its hotels had complied with fire safety regulations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/training/fire-safety-training/firm-fined-over-fatal-hotel-blaze/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Firm fined over severed fingers</title>
		<link>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/consultancy/hs-audits/firm-fined-over-severed-fingers/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/consultancy/hs-audits/firm-fined-over-severed-fingers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 May 2011 06:51:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[H&S Audits]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/?p=1070</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A play equipment manufacturer has been fined £4,700 after a worker suffered a severe hand injury.
Allan Davis was working for …]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A play equipment manufacturer has been fined £4,700 after a worker suffered a severe hand injury.</p>
<p>Allan Davis was working for Record RSS at the Shipyard Industrial Estate in Selby when he severed four fingers on his right hand using a circular saw. Selby Magistrates&#8217; Court heard his fingers were severed when the saw pulled his hand across the blade, with the saw kicking back when it came into contact with a disc fastened to the table.</p>
<p>The 55-year-old Selby man had been cutting discs for playground mini-roundabouts for the firm &#8211; a subsidiary of Playpower UK Ltd &#8211; at the time of the accident last June. Doctors had to amputate all four fingers above the first knuckle, the court heard.</p>
<p>Playpower UK Ltd of Tenacre Lane, Egham, Surrey, admitted breaching the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. and was also ordered to pay £2,382.40 in costs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/consultancy/hs-audits/firm-fined-over-severed-fingers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Firm fined for ignoring warnings</title>
		<link>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/consultancy/hs-audits/firm-fined-for-ignoring-warnings/</link>
		<comments>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/consultancy/hs-audits/firm-fined-for-ignoring-warnings/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 May 2011 06:50:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[H&S Audits]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/?p=1068</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A company that put its workers&#8217; lives in danger by ignoring two warnings about poorly maintained and dangerous electrics has …]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A company that put its workers&#8217; lives in danger by ignoring two warnings about poorly maintained and dangerous electrics has been sentenced.</p>
<p>Townfield Manufacturing Co Ltd of Oldham was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay £3,979 towards the costs of the prosecution following a trial at Trafford Magistrates&#8217; Court in Sale on May 5, 2011, after failing to attend the hearing or enter a plea.</p>
<p>The firm was found guilty of two breaches of Section 33(1)(g) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974, by failing to comply with the improvement notices that had been issued.</p>
<p>The prosecution by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) followed a visit by inspectors to its Mount Pleasant Street premises on December 15, 2009, which uncovered a series of cracked socket casings, exposed conductors and live wires.</p>
<p>Inspectors also discovered staff had to wear gloves and coats while working because the workshop had no heating and staff were left in near-freezing conditions.</p>
<p>The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) served two improvement notices on the firm, which manufactures kitchen equipment for takeaway restaurants, requiring it to provide a reasonable working temperature and to make the electrics safe.</p>
<p>On a return visit, inspectors found that the wall sockets were still unsafe and the temperatures had barely improved because staff had only been provided with one stand alone heater.</p>
<p>The HSE&#8217;s investigating inspector, Sarah Taylor, said: &#8220;This is one of the worst cases of dangerous electrics I have ever seen. The employees at this firm were at serious risk of injury or even death.</p>
<p>&#8220;The temperature of the factory was also a serious issue. It is simply not acceptable to expect staff to work in conditions so cold that you can see your breath in the air. This is not only bad for their welfare, but also potentially damaging for their health.</p>
<p>&#8220;Improvement notices are not intended to serve as a suggestion. They need to be taken seriously and, if companies fail to comply with them, HSE will look to prosecute.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.rmriskmanagement.co.uk/consultancy/hs-audits/firm-fined-for-ignoring-warnings/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

