Builder Ordered to Pay Over £10,000 After Threatening Health and Safety Inspectors in 'James Bond' Dispute
A Staffordshire builder has been handed a substantial financial penalty exceeding £10,000 following a confrontational incident where he threatened health and safety inspectors and bizarrely identified himself as the fictional spy 'James Bond'. The case, heard at Birmingham Magistrates' Court, underscores the serious legal consequences of obstructing workplace safety investigations.
Dangerous Roof Access and Immediate Confrontation
The incident unfolded on February 11 last year when two inspectors from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) were conducting routine checks in the Rugeley area. Their attention was drawn to a construction site where they witnessed two individuals accessing a roof using the bucket of an excavator—a practice considered highly dangerous and against standard safety protocols.
Upon attempting to investigate further, the inspectors were met with immediate resistance from 59-year-old David Robert Lane. Lane, who was later identified as the site manager, refused the inspectors entry to the premises and would only provide his name as 'James Bond' when questioned about his identity and role.
Escalating Threats and Police Involvement
The situation escalated rapidly as Lane made false claims about the site's operations. He asserted that he was the property owner and that the workers present were unpaid friends and relatives, not employees. He further declared that the HSE inspectors had no legal authority to conduct an inspection. Following these statements, Lane issued direct threats of violence toward the officials, prompting them to withdraw from the site for their own safety.
A week later, the inspectors returned accompanied by officers from Staffordshire Police to continue their investigation. Lane greeted the group with a shout of 'it's PC Plod!' and continued his refusal to provide his real name. He instructed all individuals on site not to communicate with the HSE team, maintaining the fiction that they were family members rather than workers.
Legal Proceedings and Substantial Financial Penalty
Despite Lane's obstructive behaviour, HSE investigators successfully identified him as the site manager through subsequent enquiries. This led to enforcement action being taken against him for obstruction under Section 33(1)(h) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974.
When notified of the impending prosecution, Lane responded with three emails filled with expletives, stating 'I won't jump through your hoops.' He failed to appear at Birmingham Magistrates' Court on two separate occasions, resulting in a trial in his absence on Friday, January 9.
The court found Lane guilty and imposed a comprehensive financial penalty:
- A fine of £3,000
- Full costs of £6,450 awarded to the prosecution
- A victim surcharge of £1,200
This brings the total amount Lane must pay to £10,650.
HSE Response and Broader Safety Context
Following the hearing, HSE inspector Gareth Langston commented on the case's significance. 'This prosecution highlights the challenges we encounter in our mission to enhance worker safety across Great Britain', he stated. 'HSE inspectors perform vital work in protecting the health, safety, and welfare of people at work'.
Langston emphasised that while the organisation conducts over 13,000 inspections annually—primarily focusing on advisory and improvement guidance—enforcement action becomes necessary in circumstances like these. 'The vast majority of employers engage with us professionally, but we will not tolerate obstruction of our inspectors', he affirmed.
The HSE defines work-related violence broadly, encompassing verbal abuse, threats (whether delivered in person, online, or by telephone), and physical assaults occurring in work-related contexts. This case represents one of the rare instances where such obstructive behaviour has resulted in criminal prosecution.
The legal proceedings were managed by enforcement lawyer Edward Parton and paralegal officer Hannah Snelling, securing a decisive outcome that reinforces the authority of health and safety regulations in the construction industry and beyond.
