Worlingworth: Family’s search for answers continues after they’re left ‘totally unsatisfied’ with court ruling

Bethany, Linda and David Skeet wore red to Ipswich Crown Court on Friday, 14 February to signify their broken hearts while hearing the verdict of Matthew Skeet's death in 2010. Bethany, Linda and David Skeet wore red to Ipswich Crown Court on Friday, 14 February to signify their broken hearts while hearing the verdict of Matthew Skeet's death in 2010.

Saturday, February 15, 2014
10:09 AM

The family of a teenage workman killed on a construction site in Suffolk have vowed to continue their search for answers after a judge’s sentencing left them “totally unsatisfied”.

To send a link to this page to a friend, you must be logged in.

Matthew Skeet, 19, died when the wall of a barn he was helping to convert in Worlingworth, near Framlingham, collapsed, crushing him and his employer Kevin Ruffles, 57, in October 2010.

Those responsible for safety failings on the site where the two men died were yesterday fined a total of £60,000 and ordered to pay combined costs of a further £20,000.

Mr Justice Rabinder Singh, sentencing at Ipswich Crown Court, said the fines “cannot and do not attempt to put a value on the loss of human life”.

“Nothing which I say can provide adequate comfort to the family of Mr Ruffles or Mr Skeet,” he added.

However the Skeet family, from Woodbridge, have despaired at what they believe is the impotence of the justice system.

Although the safety failings were not directly attributed to the deaths, Linda Skeet, Matthew’s mother, said the fines were “comical”, a “failure of justice” and had tainted her son’s memory.

“My son was wiped off the face of the earth through no fault of his own and it seems as though his life was barely worth a penny,” she said.

“We’re not satisfied that justice has been done and we won’t rest until we feel that it has been.

“Matty was the innocent party in all of this and yet no one seems to have been held fully accountable for his death.”

Barry Potts, 65, a structural engineer from Freston, was fined £15,000 and ordered to pay £5,000 in costs for his part in safety failings on the site leading up to the fatal accident.

Elliston Steady & Hawes (Building) Ltd, the site contractor, was fined £45,000 and ordered to pay a further £15,000 in costs at the hearing.

The court heard that Mr Skeet and Mr Ruffles had died when the barn’s gable wall fell on them following the excavation of a trench which undermined its foundations.

Investigators for the Health and Safety Executive had determined that there was “no rational explanation” for Potts to agree to the excavation being carried out in the method suggested by Mr Ruffles.

Judge Singh said Potts had “failed to consider the inherent dangers of the area being investigated” and held a “fundamental misunderstanding of the risks involved”.

“He fell far below the standards expected of him by the health and safety at work act,” he ruled.

Judge Singh agreed with the company’s defence that it was “entitled to rely on” Potts in maintaining the site safety.

However he said there had been a “serious breach” in safety because of its failure to ensure the correct method statement were produced.

“I accept that (the company) failed in its responsibilities to properly manage the project and put appropriate mechanisms in place and this was not simply a failure of documents being in place,” he said.

7 comments

  • are the fines compensation for the familys of the dead men or does it go to the council ?

    Report this comment

    TERENCE MANNING

    Saturday, February 15, 2014

  • part two [ someone please answer my question as i have asked this before.

    Report this comment

    TERENCE MANNING

    Saturday, February 15, 2014

  • That's an interesting point Terence ,,, I doubt weather it's compensation for the family's mate

    Report this comment

    MIGUEL100

    Saturday, February 15, 2014

  • Hi Terence, the money mentioned in the article would be paid to the court. I don't think any of it would go to the council. Money going to the victim's family would be designated as compensation; I don't know if the compensation has been sorted out yet.

    Report this comment

    BigGeoff

    Saturday, February 15, 2014

  • That's an interesting point Terence ,,, I doubt weather it's compensation for the family's mate

    Report this comment

    MIGUEL100

    Saturday, February 15, 2014

  • That's an interesting point Terence ,,, I doubt weather it's compensation for the family's mate

    Report this comment

    MIGUEL100

    Saturday, February 15, 2014

  • thanks miguel 100 ,health and safety always says something is wrong but compensation is never mentioned.

    Report this comment

    TERENCE MANNING

    Sunday, February 16, 2014

The views expressed in the above comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this site

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

loading...
iwitness24 Your news is our news Facebook Like your local paper Twitter Join the conversation Ipswich Borough Council

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT