Sponsored Ads
Twitterfeed
- Changes to asbestos regulations – CAR 2012 - The Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 came into force on 6 April 201... http://t.co/dj4pBtgU
- #Asbestos News: £133 million order book for Silverdell PLC http://t.co/VnyShrXR
- Bath MP Don Foster’s backing for asbestos dump protest - Bath MP Don Foster has added his voice to a campaign to sto... http://t.co/QOAlkjMp
- #asbestos Bath MP Don Foster’s backing for asbestos dump protest: Bath MP Don Foster has added his voice t... http://t.co/ZGgfsLMk #news
- INDG223(rev5): Managing asbestos in buildings A brief guide http://t.co/V6AZOCxc
- Somerset widow gets Bristol Water asbestos death payout - A Somerset woman is to get £290,000 in compensation from ... http://t.co/7RNw53LF
- #asbestos Somerset widow gets Bristol Water asbestos death payout: A Somerset woman is to get £290,000 in... http://t.co/XNksoUTa #news
- Local councils satisfy HSE on asbestos management in schools http://t.co/o3Wuk3Gm
- #asbestos Council neglected to inform tenants of asbestos disturbance: A local authority and a building co... http://t.co/0X3n6YcY #news
- Parent firm liable in “historic” asbestos case - In a judgement that could have far-reaching ramifications for UK c... http://t.co/dob1ua4w
Archive for the ‘Asbestos News’ Category
Redhills is one of the UK’s leading asbestos and environmental consultancies.
We have produced this document to answer the following Legionella related questions.
- What is Legionella?
- Where does Legionella come from?
- How can a person contract Legionnaires’ disease?
- Who is at risk from Legionnaires’ disease?
- What are the symptoms of Legionnaires’ disease?
- What measures exist to control Legionnaires’ disease?
- How do I manage my water systems and remain compliant?
- Can the growth of legionella be prevented?
- What is L8?
- What can be done if a water system is already contaminated, or is suspected of being contaminated?
- What action should I take in the event of an outbreak?
For answers to all these questions, download the document here.
Local MPs have been criticised by campaigners for voting against a bid to stop asbestos victims losing some of their compensation in legal fees.
Peers in the House of Lords have however given mesothelioma sufferers some fresh hope by insisting that patients are exempted from handling over up to 25% of any compensation to pay their solicitors.
The issue has come up as part of wide-ranging reforms of the country’s legal system.
The Government’s Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders’ Bill aims to save £350 million a year and speed up legal proceedings.
However, mesothelioma victims stand to lose out, under the changes planned by ministers, because of a change in who pays their solicitors.
An amendment to the Bill, one of many proposed by the House of Lords, was aimed at stopping these changes but, it was overturned in the Commons by 292 votes to 256.
Derby North Labour MP Chris Williamson voted for the amendment but Conservatives Andrew Griffiths (Burton), Jessica Lee (Erewash), Patrick McLoughlin (Derbyshire Dales), Nigel Mills (Amber Valley) and Heather Wheeler (South Derbyshire) voted against it.
Mr Williamson said it was “completely wrong” the way some MPs had voted.
THE widow of an ex-headteacher who died from asbestos exposure is urging the House of Lords to stand fast after the Government refused to exempt victims from legal costs.
Marie Hughes watched husband Phil die from cancer after coming into contact with asbestos at Brymbo Steelworks in his younger years.
The Government voted against some amendments to its controversial Legal Aid bill to exempt asbestos victims paying the costs, despite rebel Tories and Lib Dems voting the other way last week.
It will again come before the House of Lords tonight for further debate and could be sent back to the Commons if the peers are not satisfied.
Mr Hughes was a former of headteacher of Tanyfron School, near Wrexham, and died, aged 57, in 2005.
Mrs Hughes, of Coed-y Glyn, Wrexham, said if they’d had to worry about the financial implications of trying to press for a claim without legal aid, they might not have bothered.
“I was very disappointed the bill went through in the Government vote on Monday,” she said. “But I did take heart that there were Liberal Democrat and Conservative MPs who could not vote with the Government.
“It is now going back to the House of Lords and I would urge them not to pass this through, back what they backed, and send it back to the House of Commons where hopefully more will reject it.”
Disgusted residents have spoken of their shock after a bag believed to contain asbestos was dumped outside their homes.
The large red bag – which carried a warning that it contained asbestos – was left inside an abandoned shopping trolley on the pavement close to Duncombe Street car park.
It was spotted by a resident on Tuesday night who contacted the Grimsby Telegraph to express his concerns.
And although the bag and the trolley have now been removed, it remains a mystery as to who disposed of them.
Yesterday, North East Lincolnshire Council said it had no record of fly-tipped asbestos being reported in Duncombe Street, and had therefore not arranged for it to be collected.
And Shoreline Housing Partnership, which owns the flats across the road from where the bag was dumped, was also unaware of the incident.
A resident from the block of flats on the corner of Werneth Road, who did not wish to be named, described seeing the trolley containing the red bag being dumped sometime between 5pm and 6pm on Tuesday.
Environmental campaigners told a High Court judge today that an Olympic basketball training facility was being built on parkland filled with “lead and asbestos”.
They said the facility in Waltham Forest, north London, was being put up in an area “landfilled” after the Second World War and workers were disturbing “contaminated” earth.
Demonstrators raised concerns as Mr Justice Arnold – who has said he has tickets for an Olympic basketball game – renewed an order “restraining” them from engaging in “unlawful activity” at the site.
The judge granted the injunction on April 4 after lawyers representing the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) – a public body responsible for building Games venues – said protesters were stopping workers getting to the site at Leyton Marsh, which is part of a regional park.
He renewed it at a High Court hearing in London today after hearing arguments from the ODA and protesters.
The judge was a told that the ODA had licensed the site from park owners. Planners had given permission on the basis that the facility would be demolished and land restored to its previous condition after the Games.
He said he had to balance the ODA’s rights under that agreement and demonstrators’ rights to free speech and assembly.
Results from the 2011 Great British Asbestos Survey have been released and reveals the level of awareness of asbestos in buildings from a wide range of industry.
The results for the Great British Asbestos in Buildings Survey 2011 are now available. The annual industry wide survey, carried out by the UKAS Accredited Asbestos Campaign www.asbestosinspectionbodies.co.uk , provides a comprehensive and accurate picture of the level of awareness of Asbestos in Buildings within the built environment industry.
Download the Asbestos Survey results here
The Survey was completed throughout 2011 by a wide range of professionals representing a range of business sizes and disciplines from across the UK.
Overall it would appear that many commercial businesses have asbestos management procedures in place but there are some significant gaps in terms of knowledge of responsibilities, provision of information and training and this is demonstrated by the number of people that have confirmed that they have disturbed asbestos during their activities. For Residential buildings the management of asbestos doesn’t seem to be as strong and although Regulation 4 is not applicable to residential buildings the other regulations are.
Members of a Chew Valley action group are to present a detailed report opposing a second application for an asbestos landfill dump.
Campaigners are fighting against plans to dump 645,000 tonnes of the mineral at Stowey Quarry, near Chew Valley Lake.
Stowey Sutton Action Group was due to make its report public today and give further details about why it believes the renewed application should be turned down.
A previous decision to allow the application was quashed by B&NES planning committee in September after the council accepted it had not correctly followed the planning procedure in letting those living nearby know the details of the plan.
But the applicant, Oaktree Environmental, has now re-entered the application.
Campaigners have until Thursday to object before the official consultation period ends.
Members have put together a detailed 18-page report on why they believe that B&NES should again turn down the application. The report goes through the negative effects the dump would have on the area.
The Supreme Court in its judgment ruled, “for the purposes of employer liability policies, the negligent exposure of an employee to asbestos during the policy period has a sufficient causal link with subsequently arising mesothelioma to trigger the insurer’s obligations to indemnify the employer.”
Neal Stone, director of policy and communications at the British Safety Council, said: “This is a very important judgment in favour of sensible health and safety and will be welcomed by thousands of workers exposed to asbestos in the course of their work, their employers and others committed to preventing the deadly consequences of work-related diseases.”
The Supreme Court in a judgment published on 28 March 2012 upheld appeals from Unite the union, employers and others concerning the liability of insurers to employers where their employees have contracted mesothelioma following exposure to asbestos.
One of the issues on which the appeal was made to the Supreme Court was when mesothelioma was “sustained” or “contracted” – when the employee was wrongfully exposed to asbestos or when the disease actually occurs in the employee. Trade unions argued that had it not been for the Supreme Court ruling many thousands of workers exposed to mesothelioma with fatal consequences would not be compensated for the loss they, or their families, had suffered.
Recent Comments