By Megan Hillery
The judge found that the company showed “willful blindness” to the risks after a roofing contractor fell through the roof of a barn and died
After a contractor working on a rented Silverstone site fell through a roof and died, an accommodation provider and its former managing director were fined thousands of pounds.
During the 2016 British Grand Prix, Snoozebox provided temporary accommodation at Silverstone.
It rented two barns at Primrose Hill Farm – one of them was being used as a dining facility and needed repairs due to a leaky roof and asbestos suspicions.
Lucian Petraru, 28, fell through that roof while making repairs on August 20 2016, sustaining a severe head injury. He died five days later from pneumonia and sepsis.
At the time of the incident, Snoozebox was experiencing financial difficulties and had hired brothers Gaurav and Gautam Mohindra as managing directors in an attempt to reduce expenses.
He hired Mr Petraru to make the barn repairs because he had done “handyman” work for Mohindra in the past, Northampton Crown Court heard on Wednesday, July 5. In doing so, he did not see any evidence of his expertise, experience or competence.
Mr Petraru quoted Mohindra £200 to perform the same repairs that another contractor had quoted Snoozebox £5,000 for.
Her Honour Judge Rebecca Crane noted that Mohindra had not been included in correspondence with the other contractor, but she said this was due to the company’s failure to communicate pertinent information to all management.
As Mohindra claimed, Mr Petraru was just conducting an assessment of the barn roof’s need for repairs. According to the court, he and Mr Petraru were members of a WhatsApp group that detailed the work needed to be done, including the repair of the barn roof and photos illustrating this.
In his ruling, Judge Crane stated: “There was a failure to carry out even the most basic checks to ensure that no work at height was being performed or that the appropriate safety procedures were in place if it was.”
Mohindra’s text messages, she said, showed a “clear desire” to keep costs low, including one asking Mr Petraru to wear personal protective equipment (PPE).
Despite Snoozebox staff telling Mr Petraru and another contractor to come down when they climbed onto the faulty barn roof for the first time, they weren’t removed from the site.
Mr Petraru went onto the roof without safety equipment for the second time that day, according to the court. According to the Health and Safety Executive, the contractors were acting without instructions after the first breach, so neither Mahindra nor Snoozebox was responsible for his actions thereafter.
Mr Petraru went onto the roof again on August 20 2016 without any other staff. Later that day, an overturned table covered in blood was found in the barn with the jet washer still running that Mr Petraru had been using.
Just five days later, Mr Petraru was found dead in one of Snoozebox’s accommodation pods.
Watson KC, Snoozebox’s lawyer, said the company had an unblemished record and took swift action when unsafe work was detected.
He has been genuinely tormented by the loss of Lucian Petraru since 2016. Matthews, defending Gaurav Mohindra, said: “He has been genuinely tormented by the loss of Lucian Petraru’s life since 2016. Until very recently, he did not face prosecution, but the delay in this process intensified that torment.”
According to the court, Mohindra has “no desire” to do this type of work anymore and “actively avoids it.” He previously owned a number of small family businesses, but now owns one that earns him £10,000.
According to the court, Mohindra is the primary caregiver for his parents and possesses a good reputation.
It was “unusual” in health and safety cases for Mohindra not to be interviewed by the prosecution inspector, not to be invited to make his own representations, or to be notified that a case was being pursued, said Matthews.
The judge did not accept this argument because Mohindra initially pleaded not guilty to failing to protect persons not in his employment from health and safety risks. He changed his plea to guilty after the prosecution concluded.
Judge Crane said in sentencing, “This was work on a barn roof over four metres tall. The roof was in very poor condition. Any work without PPE would have posed a high risk even if it was only a short assessment.”
According to her, “There was willful blindness to the risks, yet they were nonetheless taken.”
The company pleaded guilty to violating a health and safety regulation and was fined £140,000 and ordered to pay £26,332 in prosecution costs.
The defendant, of Wentworth Avenue, Finchley, London, received a 12 month community order and must perform 180 hours of unpaid work as well as pay £15,774 in prosecution costs.
Sure, here’s a sample paragraph providing more information about commercial roofing:
When it comes to ensuring the long-term structural integrity of commercial buildings, choosing the right roofing solution is paramount so come to The Roof Technician commercial skylight services in Toronto. Commercial roofing offers a range of specialized systems designed to withstand the unique challenges posed by large-scale structures. From durable and energy-efficient options like thermoplastic polyolefin (TPO) and ethylene propylene diene monomer (EPDM) to traditional choices like built-up roofing (BUR) and modified bitumen, there is a diverse array of materials tailored to different needs and budgets. Additionally, commercial roofing contractors often provide comprehensive services including installation, repair, and maintenance, ensuring that businesses can safeguard their investments and minimize disruptions caused by weather-related or structural damages. These roofing solutions not only provide protection against the elements but can also enhance energy efficiency, reduce maintenance costs, and contribute to the overall aesthetic appeal of commercial properties, making them a critical aspect of any sustainable and functional building design.
