As reported by the BBC, HSE and us, amongst others, Amey Community Limited, of Furnival Street, London was fined £600,000 (plus £15,186.85 in costs) last week.
Pleading guilty to breaching Section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, at Lincoln Magistrates’ Court, the offence related to the death of an inmate at HMP Lincoln in 2017 from Legionnaires’ disease.
While the company were reported to have said, there were many "complicating factors" which made it "hard to completely manage the risk" of contracting legionella, following the fatality and HSE investigation found they had:
- “failed to act on a risk assessment carried out in 2016;
- failed to put in place a written scheme for preventing and controlling legionella risks;
- failed to ensure that appropriate water temperatures were maintained; and
- failed to monitor water temperatures in the water system in October and November 2017.”
Water samples collected for the deceased man’s cell and a nearby shower block, as part of the investigation, tested positive for the presence of Legionella too.
Yet again though we find it is the tactical management around risk assessment written scheme – often along with training (although this wasn’t highlighted in this particular case), where problems arise. Your risk assessment is the start, not the end, of the process and seen as an investment, not just a compliance tick.
Accepted building are different and can pose different challenges from a water management perspective. But that is why a site-specific risk assessment used as the basis for control in developing a credible written scheme is so important. Those implementing the written scheme from duty holder and responsible person to those performing the required control monitoring, testing and inspection, all need to be competent and trained too.
“Log book” thinking must change, it is not about just recording the data, it is about understanding what it is telling you about your management (so what you really need a coherent management system).
The generated work needs to be regularly and properly reviewed to identify how the systems are performing and whether the controls remain effective. If not, what alternatives are available and should be introduced?
Until we change the thinking, avoidable deaths will sadly continue.