We are operating at reduced capacity due to COVID-19 Alert Level Two restrictions. Please only call our 0800 number if someone is at serious risk of harm or has been seriously injured, become seriously ill, or died as a result of work.
For other notifications please complete our online forms at Notify WorkSafe.
Court Summary - at a glance
The Defendant’s actions involved widespread breaches of the standards expected to manage the risks with asbestos, namely that:
- The Defendant did not read the Asbestos Demolition Survey produced for the property prior to carrying out asbestos removal work;
- The Defendant failed to notify WorkSafe of the work and did not prepare an asbestos removal and control plan prior to carrying out the work;
- A ‘dry removal’ method was used and this has a greater associated risk of asbestos fibres becoming airborne;
- The Defendant did not enclose the building where asbestos removal work was carried out to ensure asbestos remained contained in a controlled environment;
- A negative air pressure system was not used to prevent airborne asbestos and airborne asbestos fibre levels were not monitored;
- The Defendant did not have decontamination facilities available for use or erect signs and barriers to secure the site from visitors;
- The Defendant should have notified persons nearby of the asbestos removal work that was being carried out, or warn such persons to stay away; and
- The Defendant did not ensure the materials containing asbestos were appropriately bagged or labelled.
The defendant has no Class A or Class B licence to authorise him to legally remove asbestos.
When checked by asbestos surveyor, asbestos contamination was found in parts of the house and also outside the house.
No evidence of harm noting that the effects of asbestos may not be known for years.
Regulation 54 Health and Safety at Work (Asbestos) Regulations 2016