Poor Equipment Causes Injury To Royal Mail Worker
The Law Of… securing compensation against negligent employers
Throughout the course of our working day most of us will rely on equipment supplied by our employer to complete our daily tasks.
We all assume that the equipment supplied by our employer will be of a reasonably safe standard and will be built and checked in a way that will ensure that we do not come into any unnecessary harm.
Unfortunately, as a client of Associate Ruth Magee found out, this is not always the case and sometimes unsafe equipment can cause injuries.
During the course of his employment with the Royal Mail, our client was making deliveries using a bicycle supplied by the company.
When he attempted to turn into a side road, the bicycle's saddle snapped, causing our client to lose control of the bike and forcing him to jump into the road; as a result of this, he suffered a jarring injury to his lumbar spine and a sprain to his left ankle.
Arranging an appointment with a medical expert, Ruth was able to show that the incident resulted in pain and suffering in our client's ankle for 3 months and in his back for 12 months.
The central point in this case was the fact that our client's employer expected him to use a bicycle, which they had provided, to complete his daily tasks.
Despite this expectation, the saddle on the bicycle was defective and unsafe, causing our client injuries and losses.
In the face of overwhelming evidence, the Royal Mail admitted liability and offered compensation to our client.
Ruth referenced the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 (PUWER), which were set out to look after employees in the course of their employment and protects them from any harm caused by unsafe or defective work equipment.
Under the regulations, people and companies that own, operate, or have control over work equipment have a duty to ensure that they are suitable for intended use, maintained to a working condition, accompanied by suitable health and safety measures, and are used in accordance with specific requirements.
As Ruth explains, this was a clear case where the Royal Mail did not adhere to work equipment regulations:
"I was glad that I could settle this case for my client, who suffered injury and losses because of the Royal Mail's failure to follow clear regulations on working equipment."
"Sadly, we see all too often that workers are being injured because of their employer's failure to maintain safe working equipment; however, this case goes to show that employees do not have to suffer in silence and seeking legal advice can help them receive the compensation they deserve."
"Many people feel nervous claiming against their employer; however, employers must have liability insurance to compensate employees when accidents happen."
"If, like our client in this case, you have suffered an injury because of equipment supplied by your employer, you could be eligible for compensation. I advise all people in this situation to get in touch as soon as possible, as most personal injury claims are subject to a time limit after an injury has been sustained."