Building firm boss ‘has no idea’ how boy, 10, got into construction site before plunging to his death through manhole

A FATAL accident inquiry into the death of a schoolboy who plunged to his death after falling down a manhole has got underway.

Shea Ryan, 10, lost his life at a building site near his home in Drumchapel, Glasgow, on July 16, 2020.

4

4

4

The lad had got through a fence and fell 20ft to his death after climbing down a manhole.

The inquiry started today at Glasgow Sheriff Court.

Graeme Clark, joint managing director of RJ McLeod (Contractors) Ltd – the company responsible for the building site – said he had “no idea” how the youngster got onto the construction site.

The firm was previously fined £860,000 for safety failures which led to the death.

The company was also ordered to pay a £60,000 victim surcharge.

Mr Clark said: “He shouldn’t have been able to get into the site.

“I have no idea how he was able to get in. He shouldn’t have been able to get in.”

He added that he believed there was a cover on the manhole weighing approximately 78kg which would be “difficult” for a 10-year-old to lift.

But he agreed with advocate depute Nicola Gillespie that the cover “must have been moved somehow” for Shea to be able to access the shaft.

Mr Clark said he first became aware of the incident at about 9am on the morning of July 17, when he was telephoned by the assistant site manager.

He said he immediately travelled to the site, which he had not personally visited before.

Mr Clark told the inquiry: “I was there to ensure I was giving support to people, because of the staff on site that day, and hopefully to gain knowledge of the sequence of events that led to the accident.”

He said that while he was there, he walked around to inspect the fencing and the only damage he could see had been caused by emergency vehicles coming to the site that morning.

Mr Clark added: “The fencing was in place apart from where it had been damaged by the ambulance and the police and fire rescue authorities.”

Asked about what security arrangements had been in place at the time of the incident, he said there had been “industry-standard fencing” around the site and CCTV at the site office.

Mr Clark added that a health and safety officer responsible for a number of the company’s sites would have visited the site once a week or so to carry out an inspection.

He said these security measures would have been decided on following a risk assessment by senior site officials before work started in March 2020.

Mr Clark said a number of changes to security arrangements were made after Shea’s death.

These included the installation of an extra layer of fencing at the part of the site next to the play park, CCTV on the perimeter fence, motion sensors, and the securing of manhole covers with ballast bags.

He also said a formal process for recording damage to perimeter fencing identified during daily inspections was introduced, which had not existed prior to the incident.

The advocate depute asked him whether the decision to install extra fencing in the area close to the play park was “because you thought the existing fencing wasn’t good enough?”

Mr Clark denied this, explaining that the fencing had been adequate under the risk assessment that was carried out when the site was set up, and that they now had “additional knowledge” that made extra fencing, along with the other measures, appropriate.

Ms Gillespie pressed him on this point, saying he had said he had not known how Shea got into the site: “But immediately you thought you’d put extra fencing in the area next to the play park?”

Mr Clark responded that the company had been aware of the play park when the original security plan was drawn up, and the firm “had a contractual obligation from Glasgow City Council not to fence it off”.

When asked why this was, he replied: “You’ll have to ask Glasgow City Council.”

David Swanney, representing Shea’s mother, pressed Mr Clark on failings in the company’s risk assessment process, including the failure to record fence inspections in the period before her son’s death.

He pointed out that damage to the fencing would have been a “sign members of the public were accessing the site”, in breach of the company’s legal responsibilities.

Mr Swanney added that damaged fencing “increases opportunity for members of the public to access the site”.

He put it to Mr Clark: “Do you, on behalf of your company, accept your failures led to the death of Shea Ryan?”

The director initially said “no”, but later clarified that the company did accept responsibility for Shea’s death in respect of failures in its risk assessment processes.

The inquiry opened with a reading of a statement from the boy’s mother, Joanne Ferguson.

She said before her son’s death, it was “well known” children had been able to get onto the site, and she wanted to know why no action had been taken to prevent this.

Ms Ferguson said she also wanted to know who uncovered the manhole, when they did so, and why it had been left uncovered.

She concluded: “We miss Shea every single day… My heart’s broken, and my life will never be the same again.”

FAIs are not held to attribute blame to any person or party, but instead aim to establish how similar accidents can be avoided in the future.

The inquiry continues.