Riaz Ahmad, of Dickenson Road, Manchester, has been jailed for eight months after one of his properties collapsed during demolition work.
Manchester Crown Court heard how Mr Ahmad appointed a group of workers, who had no experience in construction, to carry out demolition work at the property in Oldham.
On 11 August 2017, after receiving a call from Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council's building control department, a Health and Safety Executive (HSE) inspector visited the site and found almost all the internal walls and supports of the roof had been taken out. A Prohibition Notice was served to prevent any further work and a major road running past the building was closed.
It was agreed a day later that there was no safe way of accessing the building and Oldham Council secured an order to demolish the building. However, soon after this the roof and wall collapsed, triggering an emergency response involving Greater Manchester Police and the Fire Service, during which properties were evacuated and the area cordoned off.
-- Advertisement --
An emergency demolition of the remaining building was carried out later that day and local businesses faced significant disruption as the site was made safe.
A HSE investigation found the collapse could have been prevented had a principal contractor been appointed and a suitable risk assessment been carried out. HSE said this could have ensured the stability of the building during the demolition with regards to temporary works and control measures such as scaffolding.
In addition, HSE said Mr Ahmad did not suitably plan the work as he employed unskilled workers, neglected the risks from working at height and stability of the building, failed to provide them with basic welfare facilities and did not consider several health hazards.
Mr Ahmad was found guilty of breaching Section 2 (1) and Section 3 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and Regulation 19 (1) of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015. He was sentenced to eight months imprisonment for each offence (to run concurrently) with £65,000 in costs.
In his sentencing, the Judge stated: "This was a very serious case indeed. It was nothing short of a miracle that only one person was injured. A clear statement has to be made to those who undertake significant projects such as this, namely that health and safety legislation has to be adhered to for good reason, and those who ignore its basic tenets will receive punishment."
HSE inspector David Argument said: "The incident could so easily have been avoided by simply carrying out correct control measures and safe working practices.
"Duty holders should be aware that HSE will not hesitate to take appropriate enforcement action against those that fall below the required standards."
(LM/MH)
