| |
Two deaths and questions that remain unansweredTHE decision by an Old Bailey judge on Monday to fine Camden Council over the death of an scaffolder working on an estate will not bring closure to a worrying case.
On the surface the matter appears to be largely settled.
The council, and in particular the relevant housing department, have admitted responsibility – and the fine has been quantified by the judge.
While lawyers representing the partner of the scaffolder, Ralph Kennedy, intend to tenaciously pursue compensation, questions remain about the factors surrounding the fatal accident that still require answers.
First, in casting an overview of this case it is illuminating to take a brief look at another fatal accident – the collapse of a wall on the Gospel Oak estate that tragically killed two-year-old Saurav Ghai.
Both accidents happened within a few months of each other – the electrocution of Mr Kennedy occurred in September 2006, the death of Saurav Ghai in January 2007.
Common to both tragic accidents is the failure of the council to produce full records which would have shown with what frequency the required maintenance work had been carried out on the two sites.
At the Old Bailey it was accepted there had not been the necessary checks laid down by British Standard and Wiring regulations.
At an inquest into the death of Saurav evidence was heard that the construction of the wall that collapsed on him was never checked on completion.
Another common feature is that the work that led to these two tragic accidents had been outsourced to private companies.
Furthermore, when inquiries began into the accidents it soon became obvious that the housing department had lamentably failed to keep proper records to the point that no one could identify which individual had completed the repair work.
Errors in the complex world of construction are bound to occur. Accidents are likely to happen.
However, since local authority services began to be outsourced in the 1990s, critics have warned of the danger that, among other things, the inspectorate arm of building companies will become emasculated.
These warnings were rejected by all parties in the borough. But does this absolve the housing department?
Housing officials got it wrong in the years leading up to the death of Mr Kennedy and Saurav Ghai. Their admission of failure at the Old Bailey should not be the end of the matter.
A full and proper inquiry into the history of these tragic deaths, and into the housing department in particular, will, we are sure, provide answers and recommendations that will ensure that the grave errors, sustained over many years, are not likely to be repeated. |
 |
|
|
| |
| |
