Car dealership fined for not removing asbestos

Published: Safety and Health Practitioner, November 2008

A London car dealership has been fined after failing to remove asbestos three years after the hazardous substance was found at its premises.

The dealership pleaded guilty at Thames Magistrates’ Court on 28 October to three separate charges: under section 3 of the HSWA 1974; reg.4(8) of the Control of Asbestos Regulation 2006, for not having a written plan; and reg.16 of the same regulations, for failure to carry out work to ensure that the asbestos didn’t spread. The firm was fined a total of £7000 and ordered to pay costs of £2083.

The court heard, that an environmental health officer, from a London borough, visited the site on 3 October last year, as part of the council’s ‘duty to manage asbestos’ campaign. The inspector learned that the company was in possession of an asbestos management survey, published in September 2004, which recommended the immediate removal of asbestos debris from pipe-work in a rooftop boiler. The report also stated that regular checks should be carried out on other asbestos products in the building.

The inspector found that the recommendations from the survey had not been acted on, and decided to prosecute the company. The council subsequently organised a plan for the asbestos to be removed.

In mitigation, the dealership said mismanagement was the reason why it had failed to arrange for the removal of the asbestos. It was also keen to stress that it had not purposely ignored the findings of the survey in order to save money. The company stated that this was an isolated incident and it subsequently cooperated with the council to remove the asbestos.

The London borough health commercial services manager stated: “It is upsetting that a large company had only carried out part of its duty for the health and safety of its employees. The firm had carried out an independent survey to locate possible asbestos risks but failed to action the recommendations.

“The risks of asbestos are well-known and the company should have carried out immediate remedial action as soon as it learned of the survey’s findings.”

Back to news