Court Summary - at a glance
Date of offence:
Between 6 August 2018 and 8 September 2018
Plea:
Guilty
Decision:
Convicted
Final decision date:
Fine imposed:
$23,000
Safety lessons learned:
- Conduct an adequate risk assessment, in consultation with RLT Homes Limited, of the risks associated with working at height and suitable controls to manage that risk;
- Ensure, in consultation with RLT Homes Limited, that an adequate edge protection system is in place for the entire perimeter and the openings in the roof;
- Ensure that his workers are trained and competent in installing the H frame scaffold in accordance with the manufacturers’ instructions or are supervised by a competent person;
- Monitor the work being undertaken at the site through regular inspections and active supervision.
Other orders: Work Health and Safety Project Order on the same terms as the other Defendant and to work in conjunction with them on the following matters: safety seminars to fellow franchisees, and an article to be produced for publication in Safeguard.
Defendant name:
Ryan William Neutze
Industry:
Building and construction
Date of offence:
Between 6 August 2018 and 8 September 2018
Facts in brief:
Defendant is a sole-trader who was sub-contracted by the co-Defendant to build two farm sheds. It was a pole structure and the maximum pole height was 4.8 metres and a minimum pole height was at 3.6 metres.
Work commenced on the site in August.
An Inspector visited the site on 6 September 2018 and noted a number of safety concerns including: no internal fall protection in place, no edge protection, defective “H frame scaffold” on one side of the building, single rail structure with no mid-rail along one of the gable ends, no harness system, and no means to get down from the roof. As a result, a Prohibition Notice was issued.
The other Defendant provided proprietary edge protection brackets to be installed by the Defendant.
An Inspector visited the site on 7 September 2018 and noted a number of safety concerns, including: proprietary edge protection not installed on all sides of the building, there was no bottom rail attached to the edge protection, the edge protection was attached using an improvised system, there was no infill mesh, no one had the installation instructions for the edge protection, there was an unsecured ladder used to access the mobile scaffold, the mobile scaffold was in place on unstable ground and footing without properly tightened bracing, and the mobile scaffold had no entry gate to allow access. A further Prohibition Notice was issued.
No one was injured in this matter, but at least three workers were exposed to a risk of death or serious injury arising from a fall from height.
As well as a fine and costs being awarded, His Honour sentenced the Defendant to a Project Order on the same terms as the other Defendant and to work in conjunction with them on the matters: training/safety presentation to fellow Versatile franchisees and an article to be published in Safeguard.
Work commenced on the site in August.
An Inspector visited the site on 6 September 2018 and noted a number of safety concerns including: no internal fall protection in place, no edge protection, defective “H frame scaffold” on one side of the building, single rail structure with no mid-rail along one of the gable ends, no harness system, and no means to get down from the roof. As a result, a Prohibition Notice was issued.
The other Defendant provided proprietary edge protection brackets to be installed by the Defendant.
An Inspector visited the site on 7 September 2018 and noted a number of safety concerns, including: proprietary edge protection not installed on all sides of the building, there was no bottom rail attached to the edge protection, the edge protection was attached using an improvised system, there was no infill mesh, no one had the installation instructions for the edge protection, there was an unsecured ladder used to access the mobile scaffold, the mobile scaffold was in place on unstable ground and footing without properly tightened bracing, and the mobile scaffold had no entry gate to allow access. A further Prohibition Notice was issued.
No one was injured in this matter, but at least three workers were exposed to a risk of death or serious injury arising from a fall from height.
As well as a fine and costs being awarded, His Honour sentenced the Defendant to a Project Order on the same terms as the other Defendant and to work in conjunction with them on the matters: training/safety presentation to fellow Versatile franchisees and an article to be published in Safeguard.
Related prosecutions:
Offence section:
Sections 36(1)(a), 48(1) and (2)(b), of the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015
Date(s) charged:
2 August 2019
Court:
Timaru - District Court
Plea:
Guilty
Final decision date:
Decision:
Convicted
Fine imposed:
$23,000
Maximum fine available:
$300,000
Reparation:
N/A
Last updated