Two business owners who took on a 2.4m contract to transform a department store into student accommodation have been convicted of putting their employees at potentially fatal risk from asbestos.
James Keegan, 65, and Alan Barraclough, 51, were both directors of Keebar Construction Ltd when they took on the job to transform Joplings in Sunderland into student housing in 2017. Newcastle Crown Court heard how the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) visited the site in October that year and stopped the construction work after discovering numerous employees had been exposed to the risk of asbestos over around a five-month period.
James Patrick McKeon, prosecuting for the HSE, told the court how an expert described it as "one of the worst cases of uncontrolled asbestos exposure that he had come across". He said: "Both the defendants, as directors of the company, have been found to be personally liable for the offences. They instructed others to work in the building, exposing them to serious risk from asbestos."
Read more: Masked robbers who terrorised Sunderland store workers with screwdrivers locked up
The prosecutor told the court how asbestos is an "extremely dangerous and hazardous condition" known to cause respiratory illnesses such as lung cancer, cancer of the chest cavity and fibrosis. He said: "The persons exposed do not know what future awaits them in terms of their future health and this not knowing about their health will be a cause of considerable anxiety for those and their family."
Mr McKeon said the site supervisor had been instructed to look out for asbestos, putting him and other workers in harm's way. He said: "No work should have been carried out until the area had been made safe." Mr McKeon said no one can work with asbestos unless they are licenced to do so and the Keegan and Barraclough must have known they didn't have a licence.
He told the court in Newcastle: "The prosecution say this was cost cutting at the expense of safety. By failing to remove the asbestos from the building before starting the work they save the cost, which would have been around £200,000. They also evade substantial penalty clauses for any delay in completing the work that the asbestos removal would have caused."
The court heard how the defendants failed to notify the HSE and the local council about the commencement of the work. Mr McKeon said: "The failures of the defendants were deliberate. They knowingly took no steps to protect them working in the building and showed disregard for the law. The failures were motivated by financial gain. They saved the cost in the region of about £200,000 and evaded substantial penalty clauses."
Following a trial, Barraclough, of Hutton Lane, Guisborough, and Keegan, of Larkspur Road, Marton, Middlesbrough, were found guilty of failing to ensure the health and safety of employees.
Ian West, defending Keegan, told the court how his client had been a builder for nearly 50 years and worked on mainly domestic properties. He said that, before he got involved in the Joplings job, the highest contract he had was in the region of £100,000.
Mr West said Keegan left the job to Barraclough as he had more experience in that line of work. He said: "At the time the contract was being negotiated, Mr Keegan's mother was dying. He was spending very little time at work. His contact with the negotiation of the contract was with Mr Barraclough. He had no real experience of dealing with asbestos and certainly not the quantity that was found to exist in Joplings."
He continued: "The workers that were put at risk were his own sons who worked at the family business and the defendant would never have put them and their families, potentially his own grandchildren at risk, if he knew or expected there was asbestos in the building that he knew about. The work took place over a relatively short period and there were very few workers on the site during that early period. Mr Keegan sincerely hopes that those who have been put most at risk, particularly his own sons, will not develop disease."
In relation to the prosecution suggesting they were "cost cutting at the expense of safety", Mr West said: "He had no idea how much it would cost to remove asbestos. This is not, in his case, a question of him deciding to take the lower price. He rarely visited it for the personal reasons that I have outlined."
Jonathan Harley, defending Barraclough, told the court how he client also sent his son onto the building site. He said: "He accepts that there was 10 workers involved and therefore a number of workers potentially exposed."
He pointed out that the prosecution is suggesting that his actions were deliberate. Mr Harley said it is "impossible" for anyone to come to the conclusion that the jury convicted him as anything other than negligent in what he did.
In relation to the cost cutting suggestion, Mr Harley said: "Effectively my submission is there is no evidence financially that this was a cost cutting measure." He told the court there was no evidence to confirm that he would have been "left out of pocket".
Barraclough's barrister told the court that he had been in and around the building trade for many years and had worked hard throughout his life. He told Judge Stephen Earl that, aside from the "blemish" which he was now dealing with, the defendant had a good track record.
Judge Earl adjourned the case until next month so he could consider their sentences. Keegan and Barraclough will be sentenced for the offences at Moot Hall in Newcastle on June 8.
Chronicle Live previously reported in 2018 how Joplings department store had been transformed into luxury student apartments, with the ground floor converted into retail units. Developer Jaspia Ltd said the store's legacy was at the heart of the renovation and iconic features such as the concrete canopy and clock had been retained. The building had been derelict since 2010.
Read more:
