|
The following article appeared in the Yorkshire Evening Post on 17 October, 1998. Dad who paid heavy price for DIY tragedy£7,500 fine after son loses his leg in trench horrorA father's large scale DIY building project which ended with his son losing his leg was "an accident waiting to happen", a court was told. Teenager Jed Christie had been helping to dig a sewer on land in Yeadon, Leeds, owned by his father, Lance, in May when the sides of the trench caved in, Pudsey magistrates were told. Jed, 18, who had been digging the trench along with another man, was trapped for 12 hours. He remained conscious throughout the ordeal. The teenager was eventually rescued by firefighters and parametics and taken to hospital but his left leg had to be amputated to save his life. His 42-year-old father, of Quakers Lane, Rawdon, Leeds, was fined a total of £7,500 after pleading guilty to three breaches of Health and Safety rules. David Robins, prosecuting on behalf of the Health and Safety Executive, told the court that the work was being done on a site that Christie had bought for £200,000 in order to begin development of an industrial estate. Christie, whose company, Weavabel, makes clothing labels, was hoping to expand his business interest on the site. Instead of appointing an official contractor he approached family friend Philip Beaumont to work on the preparatory site to work alongside Jed. The court heard that Mr. Beaumont had had limited experience of drainage work. Despite advice from consultants who said a supervisor was needed, Christie went ahead with the preparatory work. Mr. Robins said: "This trench in its unsupported state was an accident waiting to happen. "It was clearly calling for careful planning and the observance of the strictest safety measures. "Mr. Beaumont said he thought the trench was safe. Jed told me that on the afternoon there was a need to get the trench safe because children were around the area. "For Jed it was a horrible experience. This was a DIY job on a grand scale -- a job that went wrong. "This should act as a warning to others. "The defendant is a scarred man. He and his wife stood during the 12 hours not knowing whether their son would come out alive. He has paid a price, a heavy price." For his failure to appoint a contractor, Christie was fined £3,500. He had breached regulations which required the company to take practical steps to ensure the safety of his employees, which was punished by a £2,000 fine. For failing to appoint a planning supervisor he was also fined £2,000. In addition, Christie was ordered to pay costs of £350. Malcolm Hacking, defending, said: "It was always Mr. Christie's intention to have the commercial works undertaken by a genuine contractor. "What we are talking about here is the preparatory works. "He had for some time been looking for some land to expand his business. He is a sensitive, honest and hard-working family man. "He began the work with a well-intentioned early start. The accident itself was a cataclysmic incident. "Mr. Christie himself did not believe he was deliberately ignoring or flouting the rules. "He had no reason to believe that what was being done was not being done reasonably. "On that afternoon they had made a decision to carry on with the work. They thought they would get away with it but obviously they didn't. "The family find no place in their hearts to blame or accuse each other. I do not believe you are looking at a big commercial operation. "You are dealing with a case of misplaced trust and ignorance. You can't be harder than Mr. Christie has been on himself. See Rescuers Free Man Trapped in Ditch Ordeal for the rest of the story. Apparently, by the time this matter came to court, the nature of the construction was no longer a new meeting room. |
|
Legal Notice: The administration of this website was taken over about September, 2004 by Med Trans 1, Inc.. The content on this site was the work of the late Jan Groenveld, and as such, Med Trans 1, Inc. is not knowledgeable about the specific content presented on this website, nor is responsible for any inaccuracies that may be discovered. We wish to be fair to all parties involved, and there is no intent whatsoever to present inaccurate in formation. Therefore, if any group or individual feels that information presented on this site is inaccurate, please contact us. If the information is proven to be inaccurate, it will be either changed or removed upon receipt of verifiable proof being supplied to us. Verifiable proof is defined as a disinterested source independent of your group such as newspaper, encyclopedia, public records and similar sources. Any group or individual who wishes to supply a rebuttal to any information presented on this site may do so at any time. The length of the rebuttal is to be no more in length (number of words) than the article or material being rebutted. The rebuttal is to be within an e-mail and not as an attachment. E-Mails with attachments are automatically deleted unread due to the large number of virus attacks we received in the past. Literature, books etc. mailed to us will be discarded unread unless we specifically requested the materials. Those who send mail that is abusive in nature or combative, will not receive a response from us. Nor will any article be debated or extensive discussions be engaged in regarding an article published. Any problems with the website, please contact the webmaster
|