Poor Maintenance of door shutter led to Crush Injury to Wrist and Hand

Our client usually started her work by opening up the offices in the morning, which involved opening the front door shutters.  Normally, once the shutters have been pulled back, the two parts of the runner tracks on the floor have to be lifted up and to the side where they stay in an upright position.  Our client was not aware of any method of securing the tracks into their upright position and was aware that complaints had been made to management about the tracks falling back down instead of staying in an upright position.  These had been recorded in the Accident Report Book.

As usual, our client started to open the front door shutters.  She had lifted the left side of the runner track up and to the side into its upright position, where it was supposed to stay, and bent down to lift the right side of the runner track up.  Suddenly the left side track fell down onto her hand.

The accident was the employer’s fault because they:-

• were in breach of the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 and the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957;
• failed to ensure that the work equipment provided was so constructed or adapted to be suitable for the purpose for which it was provided or used contrary to Regulation 4(1) of the Work Equipment Regulations;
• failed to have regard for working conditions and risks to health and safety of our client which existed when using the work equipment contrary to Regulation 4(2) of the Work Equipment Regulations by e.g. not providing an alternative method of fixing the tracks in place;
• failed to provide appropriate or adequate equipment for the purpose of undertaking the task;
• caused, permitted, required or suffered the continuance of the practice of using the front door shutters when it was unsafe or unsuitable to do so;
• failed to train or instruct our client how to safely undertake her work or otherwise supervise her to see that she undertook it safely;
• caused, permitted, required or suffered our client to carry out a task of work when it was unsafe to do so;
• failed to warn our client of the dangers of working or prevent her from doing so;
• failed to provide or maintain safe equipment;
• failed to take any adequate care for the safety of our client;
• exposed our client to a danger or trap for a foreseeable risk of injury;
• breached Section 2 of the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 and/or the Workplace (Health Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 in that there was a failure to provide our client with a safe system of work leaving our client to be exposed to unnecessary injury and failure to take reasonable care that she would be safe whilst carrying out her duties;
• breached Regulation 4 of the Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992 by not ensuring that any suitable and sufficient risk assessment was carried out regarding the task our client was doing;
• breached Regulation 3(1)(a) of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 by failing to assess the risks of the health and safety of our client whilst working.

As a result of the accident, our client sustained a crush injury to her left hand and wrist.  She attended hospital after the accident.

Lawson-West, solicitors, began a personal injury claim against her employers.  Lawson-West secured compensation of £2500 for general damages in respect of her injuries.  Lawson-West also secured further compensation for travel expenses and care and assistance as our client could not drive until she had recovered from her injury.

Related Articles:-

Jammed Lever on Work Equipment led to Hand Injury

Trip on packaging strap at work caused Broken Arm

Printing caused a Dislocated Knee

Jammed Lever on Work Equipment led to Hand Injury

Our client was working as a warehouse operative and was wheeling a trolley, which was half-full of stock, with a colleague.  Our client had to lift two gates using two separate levers and lifted the left hand lever of the first gate with no problem.  Shortly afterwards she pulled the right lever.  Suddenly and without warning the right lever jammed, causing her to hit her right hand against the metal structure.

 

The accident was reported to her employer and written up in the accident book.  The accident was the employer’s fault because they:

 

·         failed to maintain the work equipment in an efficient state, in efficient working order and good repair,

·         breached their duties under the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992,

·         breached their duties under the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998,

·         failed to have in place a suitable system of inspection and maintenance so that the defect would have been repaired or rectified before the accident,

·         permitted our client to use the right lever to open the gate when they knew or ought to have known it was unsafe to do so,

·         permitted or caused the right lever to become a danger and trap,

·         contrary to the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, failed to carry out a suitable and sufficient assessment of risks to health and safety of our client to which she was exposed whilst at work,

·         failed to provide our client with a safe place of work,

·         exposed our client to an unnecessary risk of injury.

 

Our client attended hospital after the accident as she had severely bruised her hand, which was put in a sling. She also had to take time off work because she was unable to carry out her normal duties with an injured hand.

 

The employer denied liability as they regularly maintained the gates.  However, in the case of Stark v Post Office, it was made clear that regular inspections and/or servicing of work equipment does not afford a defence in cases where employees are injured by equipment malfunction or failure.  Following a later inspection, some remedial maintenance work was done on the gates, but there was no record of what damage existed prior to the inspection. 

 

A negotiated settlement was achieved with the opponent’s Solicitors after court proceedings were commenced.

 

Lawson-West recovered compensation of £1350 in respect of our client’s injuries and compensation for our client’s loss of earnings because she had to take time off work, travel expenses to and from hospital and painkillers.

 

Related Articles:

 

Trip over wire led to elbow surgery

 

Printing caused dislocated knee

 

Weighbridge trip caused torn ligaments