£20,000 fine for asbestos failings
A leisure facility was accused of treating asbestos removal as a “DIY project”, exposing staff and members of the public to this hazardous substance. How did they get the job so wrong?

Two employees of a leisure centre were tasked with pulling out fixtures in a disused plant room ahead of a conversion. No asbestos survey was carried out, and the two used angle grinders and hammers to pull out pipework and lagging and a wheelbarrow to transport it through the building to a skip outside. They were not wearing protective masks or clothing. After carrying out this work for a couple of days, a friend of one of the employees alerted them that the material in the skip may be hazardous. Environmental consultants were brought in and confirmed that they were asbestos-containing materials (ACMs), which must only be removed by licensed contractors.
The local Council investigated and found that the company had no plan for the works. It just allowed the employees, who had no knowledge or training in how to deal with asbestos, to go about it in an ad hoc fashion. They were not supplied with PPE. After a day, one of the employees started using his own mask because he was “feeling rough” due to the dust. As well as the ACMs in the skip, investigators found remnants in the plant room and along the route used to transport it through the building.
The court heard that members of the public could have been exposed to asbestos fibres, in addition to the two employees who carried out the work.the leisure centre pleaded guilty to breaching its duty under ss.2(1) and 3(1) Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare of its employees and others affected by its activities. It was fined £20,000 and ordered to pay over £5,000 in costs.
Related Topics
-
Time off for fertility treatment?
A survey by Fertility Matters at Work has revealed that more than one-third of employees undergoing fertility treatment have resigned or are considering resigning because of the physical and emotional toll. Is there a right to time off for fertility treatment?
-
Was a company buyback of EIS shares tax avoidance?
Two taxpayers used the “purchase of own shares” procedure to extract gains they’d made from enterprise investment scheme (EIS) shares. HMRC said this was unfair tax avoidance, the taxpayers disagreed. What did the Upper Tribunal decide?
-
HMRC’s new compliance check service
HMRC has published a collection of videos and notes to help if you’re picked for a compliance check. Is HMRC’s new service worth a look or is it just official propaganda?