Council guilty of safety failings after girl badly injured by faulty bollard
HAMPSHIRE County Council has been found guilty of flouting health and safety laws over an incident in which a six-year old girl was badly injured by a defective iron bollard in Lymington.
It emerged during the trial that highways chiefs were warned about the bollard less than a fortnight before the accident, but failed to take urgent action to repair or replace it.
The victim, who cannot be named for legal reasons, sustained significant head injuries after the structure collapsed on her as she climbed it on Quay Hill on 28th December 2015. She spent five months in hospital, and still requires care.
Although a cobbled street, Quay Hill is a route accessed by vehicles so is managed by HCC as the highways authority. Following an investigation by the Health and Safety Executive, the authority was charged under Section 3 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act.
That led to a trial at Bournemouth Crown Court, which ended last Friday when the jury returned a guilty verdict.
CCTV played in court showed the family walking down Quay Hill before the accident. The mother of the girl initially told police her daughter had “leapfrogged” the bollard, but later clarified it had toppled over after the youngster climbed on it.
Asked at court if the child tripped or fell into the bollard, she said, “I don’t think that’s possible”, and there was no evidence the bollard fell on the youngster when she was on the floor.
Witnesses who went before the court revealed the then Lymington county councillor Jacqui England, who runs a shop nearby, spoke with HCC highways chief Richard Bastow about the bollard some time in December 2015 – probably on the 15th – relaying concerns it had been damaged.
Two days later, Mr Bastow left a voicemail asking highways engineer Colin Hibberd to go to Quay Hill, but Mr Hibberd did not listen to that until 20th December, visiting the site the next day.
When he arrived on the 21st, he spoke with Cllr England and she told him: “This needs sorting - Christmas is coming and I don’t want anyone falling on it,” the court was told.
However, Mr Hibberd said while he found the bollard to be damaged, he did not think the work was urgent enough to warrant immediate repair, and did not class it as a “safety defect”.
A crucial aspect of the case was how the inspector came to that decision.
The court was told inspectors judge the seriousness of issues using their training and aptitude, and check their process against a HCC handbook they carry.
In his evidence, Mr Hibberd reported the bollard had two plastic ties on it when he attended the scene and carried out his inspection, although it was not specified in court when this was done or by whom.
He claimed he pushed against the bollard to check its resistance to movement and “it was clear it was stable”. He therefore did not deem it a safety issue.
Unsure if it needed repairing or to be replaced, he logged it on HCC’s system as a job that needed “further inquiry”.
He said he raised the bollard to its normal height, as leaving it on the ground would have created a potential trip hazard. He spoke with Mr Bastow about it, who did “not raise any questions”.
It emerged during the evidence that another HCC inspector visited Quay Hill on 3rd December, but did not class the bollard as a risk.
Mr Bastow said on the information he had with regards to damage to the bollard, he did not think it was “necessarily unsafe”. He recalled speaking to Mr Hibberd after his inspection, saying: “When Colin Hibberd left my office, I thought the bollard was safe.”
The court also heard from Tim Lawton, HCC’s assistant director of traffic, highways and engineering, who pointed out the council received 80,000 public enquiries about the roads every year.
During his evidence, he insisted Mr Bastow and Mr Hibberd were “fit to discharge” their duties, and described Mr Hibberd as a “stickler” for following instructions.
But Steve Spenders, who was HCC head of highways at the time and has since left the council, was critical. He told the trial the bollard should have been dealt with under the street furniture part of the HCC handbook, rather than the bollard and illuminated signs section, and claimed it was a “safety issue” that should have been rectified urgently.
Experts agreed the “main lump” of the bollard weighed around 63 kgs, and that using cable ties to secure it was an “inadequate method”. One said he was “unsurprised” a six-year-old girl could have pushed it over in its state and it was “not safe to leave it in that condition”.
It was also said barriers should have been erected around it.
The jury convicted the council after judge Robert Pawson stressed it had to be satisfied someone’s health and safety was exposed to a material risk by the unsecured bollard.
Asked to comment, a HCC spokesperson said: “We note the outcome of the trial and are considering the county council’s position.
“We do not consider it appropriate to comment further at this stage. The county council has offered appropriate help and support to the family for the welfare of the child throughout this matter and will continue to do so.”
The council will be sentenced at Bournemouth Crown Court on 18th July.
