|
Co-op fined over safety breaches
A catalogue of serious safety breaches in a major supermarket chain's stores across East Sussex put shoppers' lives at risk, fire crews have said.
The Co-op Group was fined £250,000 after 38 out of 41 of its stores failed to meet proper safety standards.
The fine was imposed after the firm admitted 13 offences. Costs of £11,176 were awarded to the fire authority.
In a statement the Co-op said it deeply regretted the breaches, and correct safety procedures were now in place.
The breaches came to light in July 2006, when a member of the public alerted East Sussex Fire and Rescue to fire safety issues concerning the Co-op store in London Road, St Leonards.
|
We can assure our customers that procedures are now in place to avoid any similar breaches of health and safety regulations
Co-op Group |
It prompted a full inspection of all of the group's stores across East Sussex where almost all of them were found to have broken fire safety regulations.
Among the breaches uncovered were obstructed or locked fire exits, fire doors wedged open, and a lack of fire alarms in some premises.
Fire service spokesman Richard Fowler said: "You put your trust into the owners of that business... what you don't expect is for a fire to occur and to find yourself trapped in a building, not able to get out of the premises.
"That was the situation we were potentially faced with in these stores."
Previous prosecution
The case against the Co-op, relating to offences at six stores, was heard at Brighton magistrates court on 3 August, with sentencing at Hove Crown Court on 14 September.
East Sussex Fire and Rescue had previously prosecuted the Co-op store in 2006 for breaches in fire safety codes of practice.
In a statement, the Co-op said it took health and safety issues very seriously.
"We can assure our customers that procedures are now in place to avoid any similar breaches of health and safety regulations.
"At the time of these regulation breaches, the group was introducing more stringent health and safety procedures.
"The Co-operative Group deeply regrets the breaches but reiterates the measures now in place ensure the safety of its valued customers and staff."
Story from BBC NEWS
First prohibition notice issued under new legislation
18 October 2006
Buckinghamshire Fire & Rescue Service has issued its first prohibition notice under legislation which came into force on 1 October.
The document was served yesterday on a four-level townhouse in Conniburrow, Milton Keynes, which has been converted from a single private home to what is known as a house in multiple occupation or HMO.
The notice prohibits the use of the third and fourth levels of the house until a fire alarm system and emergency lighting have been installed, and a fire door has been put in between the communal ground-floor kitchen and staircase. It was issued in accordance with the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005.
Chris Bailey, who heads Buckinghamshire Fire & Rescue Service's Protection Group, said: "We have taken this action in the interests of the safety of all the occupants."
The house was brought to the attention of Buckinghamshire Fire & Rescue Service's fire safety team at Broughton Fire Station after firefighters attended a fire there at the weekend. The notice was served early yesterday evening after an officer carried out a fire safety audit.
Chris added: "I would like to thank the watch managers and crews at Broughton Fire Station for their diligence and professionalism in bringing this to light."
The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, known as the RRO for short, reforms and rationalises current fire safety laws previously contained in over 100 pieces of legislation.
The new rules apply to nearly every type of building, structure and open space except for private homes and individual flats in a block or house, although communal areas are affected.
Restaurant owner fined £10,000
A Colchester restaurateur was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay costs of £15,000 in a prosecution brought by Essex Fire Authority which has set a new legal precedent.
It is probably the first time an undertaking to a court has been used to further fire safety and the Service’s legal expert Roy Carter says “it is clearly a device that would be of significant use to all British fire services in protecting the lives of relevant people when prohibition notices have been breached and adjournments are granted”.
The case was initially heard on December 20 when Feyzullah Ozgurcu, a partner of Crystal Restaurant in St Botolph’s Street was prosecuted for five breaches of a prohibition notice served on him in relation to his business premises. He was before Colchester magistrates yesterday (January 17) for sentencing.
In summing up, magistrates told him: "These offences were over a period of six months during which time the Prohibition Notice was re-inforced by repeated visits from the fire service.
"Initially, we accept the seriousness of the notice may not have impressed itself on the defendant but by the end of that period he fully intended to act in breach of the notice."
In sentencing, magistrates said they had taken into account the position of the Fire Service as to the risk posed by the premises. After the hearing, Roy Carter, head of ECFRS' legal team, said: "Today's result concludes several months of investigation undertaken by ECFRS' officers and necessitated by the defendant's reluctance to comply with life saving fire safety regulations.
"His outright refusal to abide by the terms of a Prohibition Notice, served by ECFRS, amounted to a flagrant disregard for the law and - had a fire occurred - would have put his employees in imminent risk of serious injury or death.
"Essex County Fire and Rescue Service will continue to work closely and in co-operation with businesses in Essex to secure fire safe work places. I would urge all members of the business community to review their fire precautions - taking into account the new fire regulations that came into force last October."
This is only the second time ECFRS has had to resort to law to enforce a Prohibition Notice since 1971, when the law was introduced.
The circumstances of the case applied both before and after the introduction of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety Order) as the offences occurred when the Fire Precautions Act 1971 was in force. The technical question as to what legislation could be used for the prosecution was settled by ECFRS’s barrister David Stotesbury and the prosecution was brought under section 10B of the 1971 Act.
The prosecution was brought after ECFRS discovered circumstances that presented imminent risk to life in the event of fire breaking out on the premises. A Prohibition Notice was served but subsequent follow-up inspections revealed the Notice was being breached and the defendant showed disregard for the Notice’s terms and the safety of his employees and members of the public.
When the defendant appeared before Colchester magistrates on December 20 after an earlier adjournment, he pleaded guilty to all five summonses for breaching the Notice. His Counsel made an application to the court for an adjournment before sentencing so that mitigating circumstances may be considered by the Prosecution. This was agreed, subject to his client giving an undertaking to the court that he would comply with the Prohibition Notice in its entirety.
The undertaken was given when the court made it clear to the businessman that should he breach the Notice in the interim he would most likely see the matter of his sentencing being sent to the Crown Court, where he might face a custodial sentence or a fine of up to £25,000.
|
