£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
-
Cutting the cost of a company car
You want to help your young son replace the ancient car he currently drives. The plan is for your company to buy it but for the running costs to be met by your son. That’s fine with him but is there a more tax and cost-effective alternative?
-
Meaning of “new and unused” clarified for CAs purposes
The guidance on what “new and unused” means for the purposes of first-year allowances has been updated in order to make things clearer. What’s the full story?
-
Scammers already targeting pensioners over winter fuel payments
Phishing attacks are already being sent to pensioners purporting to be from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). What’s going on and how can you avoid becoming a victim?