Tree surgery accident in Dorset involving MEWP

[DanM]

Was the machine going over caused by too quick a movement on the levers or a flaw in the system, as suggested?

 

Surely the speed it can move at full extension should be automatically limited to stop the machine been jerked around!

[silky fox]

Good Bump Dean...I remember this. Hope it goes well and there is closure on this tragic event...thanjs for taking the time.

[renewablejohn]

Was the machine going over caused by too quick a movement on the levers or a flaw in the system, as suggested?

 

Surely the speed it can move at full extension should be automatically limited to stop the machine been jerked around!

 

Should not speculate prior to the court case. Hope all goes well with the court case.

[Dean Lofthouse]

Cant post anything at the moment Dan, the case is expected to take 2 days in a five day window. In other words the trial could start any day next week. If it concludes next week I,ll update the thread.

[Topogwen]

Tree surgeon who suffered serious injuries when cherry picker toppled over wins court case.

 

 

A SELF-EMPLOYED tree surgeon who suffered serious injuries while working on an unsafe machine is hoping for a significant payout after winning a four-year legal battle.

 

Chris Baxter, from Blandford, suffered multiple injuries after the cherry picker he was in toppled over while he was pruning trees at a property in West Dorset in December 2010.

 

The RQG 18 E Spider cherry picker, which was supplied by Lymington-based Up and Out Platform Hire, slipped off its floor pads, toppled over from height and crashed to the ground.

 

The accident left the 33 year-old with a fractured spine and spinal cord injury, a dislocated shoulder, fractured ribs, pelvis and leg and broken teeth.

 

On Monday [January 12] a judge at the Royal Courts of Justice ruled Up and Out Platform Hire had supplied a machine that was not safe to use, thus paving the way for Mr Baxter’s legal team to negotiate a settlement.

 

Mr Baxter said: “It’s a massive relief to finally know that this accident was caused by the machine and not by my error or an error of my employees.

 

“When the machine was installed I believed that I was been given the right equipment for the job and that machine would be safe for me and my employees to use – especially because the company came to help set it up.

 

 

“I now understand the machine is no longer in production and the new machines of the market have a significantly different design to make them safer.”

 

In a statement, Angela Batchelor and Sofie Toft, injury lawyers at Irwin Mitchell, representing Mr Baxter, said: “This is a big boost for Chris as today’s judgment now paves the way for us to negotiate a fair settlement on his behalf.

 

“The judgment also raises serious concerns regarding the safety of using the Spider RQG 18E machine and we hope that others still using the machine will take note of this judgment and ensure that they take the necessary precautions to keep their workers safe.”

[Topogwen]

Here is the link with interview.

 

Tree surgeon who suffered serious injuries when cherry picker toppled over wins court battle (From Bournemouth Echo)

[kentjames]

"slipped off its floor pads, toppled over from height and crashed to the ground"

 

Any more on this Dean or is that still out of bounds for conversation?

 

Seems odd it slipped off the pads? was it on sloping ground or small pads?

[kimtree]

"a fault with the design of the machine" sounds exactly like Dean's accident cause.

[kimtree]

there is a write up in Vertikal magazine about this accident

[Dean Lofthouse]

Theres been a discussion going on, on the Arbtalk Facebook page which I have had to get involved in....

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/128622575070/permalink/10152951693610071/

 

The HSE investigated the cause of the accident, but it was concluded in court that that investigation was flawed and far from conclusive.

 

The machine was inspected and deemed faultless, but this inspection was carried out by Promax Access the machine supplier, so was not independent, it was also far from thorough. It was then destroyed before any "thorough" independent inspection could be carried out and before the court case was heard, the machine was clearly vital evidence.

 

The machine was setup on a slope of some 5 degrees which in terms of this machines capability is basically level ground.

 

The ground had not "given" underneath the pad and the machine had been setup correctly and checks had been carried out.

 

According to the statement of the Promax expert witness, this type of machine can "dance around" in other words, the natural flex in the chassis of this machine during normal use, can allow the feet to move.

 

It is also possible that the same scenario could have also happened if the machine had developed the same fault as mine, but because the machine was destroyed, this couldn't be established.

 

I am summizing that, with the lack of an independent tests to eliminate fault on the machine, the judge could only conclude that the machine slipped off the flat pads with the machines "dancing around effect" and that if the pads had been anchored or recessed, this slippage could have been prevented.

 

The newer version of this machine does have pads attached to the legs.

Edited January 19, 2015 by Dean Lofthouse