The court found Benjamin Hannaford exposed multiple people to asbestos when he failed to handle it properly. Photo: Michelle Kroll.
A tradie failed to use “available and feasible” mitigation measures when removing asbestos material, exposing multiple people to serious health risks.
Benjamin Luke Hannaford’s company was engaged to replace the roof of a garden shed, but he mishandled the material while removing, transporting and storing it after realising it contained asbestos.
The now 47-year-old pleaded guilty in the ACT Magistrates Court in August to one charge of failing to comply with a health and safety duty, causing a risk of death or serious injury.
In his recent decision, Magistrate Ian Temby stated that the offending was a serious example of its kind, and recognition of how multiple people were exposed to the toxic material was necessary.
In early June 2022, Mr Hannaford and a worker arrived at a Canberra property to remove and replace the roof.
Magistrate Temby said that even though Hannaford realised “at some point” the sheets were contaminated with asbestos, he chose to leave the material next to the shed.
It would lie there for more than two weeks, until Hannaford returned to remove it.
“While Mr Hannaford may not have known that the old roof sheets contained asbestos when he agreed to replace [the client’s] roof on his garden shed, he was required to ensure that all asbestos that was likely to be disturbed by the refurbishment was identified and removed by a licensed asbestos removalist before the refurbishment commenced,” he said.
A separate charge of failing to comply with a health and safety duty, causing a risk of death or serious injury was also taken into account on sentencing.
This second charge related to Hannaford’s ongoing failure to dispose of the material properly after moving it to a caravan park.
“Mr Hannaford’s eschewal of his responsibilities continued with his engagement of [a second man], who was not a licensed asbestos removalist,” Magistrate Temby said.
“Worse still, he deliberately sought to deceive [the other man] by telling him they were only going to collect an old fence when he knew that the roof sheets contained asbestos.”
The material was covered with a tarp and left outside the other man’s home for more than three weeks before it was taken to Hannaford’s residence.
In July, WorkSafe ACT would ultimately use a licensed asbestos removalist to dispose of that material, after Hannaford failed to respond to a notice to do so within 48 hours.
Magistrate Temby found that Hannaford was aware of how he should handle asbestos.
“The notice he received from WorkSafe Act only confirmed what Mr Hannaford already knew.”
Magistrate Temby also said that while the likelihood of others inhaling airborne asbestos fibres was unknown, the risk of illness and anxiety from their exposure remained.
He also said that Hannaford could have easily used a range of “available and feasible” mitigation measures, such as wearing appropriate protective equipment or using water suppression techniques, but he did not.
In a statement, WorkSafe ACT Commissioner Jacqueline Agius described this case as an example of why people should remain mindful of how they handle asbestos.
“This incident is yet another troubling example of a trader taking dangerous shortcuts in a high-risk situation, showing a blatant disregard for legal obligations and the safety of people in our community.
“The selfish neglect shown for the safety of other workers and members of the public, including home occupants in their own home who could have been exposed to deadly asbestos fibres, is utterly unacceptable.”
Hannaford was handed an $8000 fine and a two-year Good Behaviour Order. He must also complete 100 hours of community service within 24 months.
This sentence was discounted in consideration of his guilty plea, while Magistrate Temby also took into account his “strained” financial situation when calculating the fine.
That could be 200-500 individual driver conversations (shift dependent), instead of displaying a… View