'Landmark' city centre hotel fined £24,000 for health and safety failings

But Peel Hotels was told that it would have been fined “a six figure sum” had the company, and the hospitality industry in general, not been left in such a perilous financial situation due to the Covid 19 pandemic.

The national hotel chain appeared at Bradford and Keighley Magistrates Court on Tuesday morning charged with four offences relating to asbestos and health and safety failings.

The issues had been reported to Bradford Council’s Environmental Health department by Gary Peacock, former manager of the hotel, shortly after he resigned from his role in 2018.

Along with the costs the company were ordered to pay to Bradford Council, Peel Hotels will have to pay a total of £30,000.

A representative from the company pleaded guilty to a charge of being an employer and failing to discharge general health, safety and welfare duty to employee, being aware of asbestos related material and failing to ensure the health and safety at work for the hotel’s employees. The second charge was similar, but referred to the safety of people not in the employ of the hotel.

Couple handed huge fine after failing to ensure private water supply was 'fit for human consumption'

One charge related to a defect on a goods lift in the hotel, and another related to the hotel’s policy of working from height, and followed an accident that saw a worker fixing a light using a ladder falling and suffering an injury.

The Grade II listed city centre building dates back to the 1880s, and has hosted visits by icons such as Laurel and Hardy, The Beatles and Sir Henry Irving, who died in the hotel in 1905.

National hotel chain Peel Hotels purchased the hotel in 1998.

Giles Bridges, prosecuting on behalf of Bradford Council, told the court “On May 16 2018 Environmental Health was contacted by Gary Peacock, the former manager of the Midland Hotel, who alleged there was an amount of Asbestos in various locations in the building and that the risk wasn’t being managed correctly.”

He said a lift engineer had pointed out the asbestos after doing some work in late 2017. Mr Peacock raised his concerns about the continued presence of asbestos in the hotel with the company, but felt the response was lacking.

Areas with asbestos included a basement corridor, a lift shaft and a former kitchen area in the basement - areas used by staff but not customers.

Mr Bridges said: “What was being done to deal with it was not being done as quickly as it should have been.”

A report detailing the presence of asbestos was produced in November 2017, but by Spring 2018 Mr Peacock was concerned there had been no action taken. The alleged lack of action was one reason Mr Peacock had given for resigning in May 2018 - the court was told.

He informed Environmental Health, and two officers visited the hotel on May 22. They saw the areas of asbestos and when they asked to see certain paperwork, such as health and safety assessments, staff were unable to produce them.

The court heard that the officers were “concerned” that the asbestos risk hadn’t been taken more seriously.

Robert Peel, owner of Peel Hotels, was interviewed in March 2019, and acknowledged the company should have taken steps to deal with the situation earlier.

The company submitted a purchase order for works to remove the asbestos in April 2018 - but Mr Bridges pointed out that this only happened four months after the November 2017 report.

Charles Row, representing Peel Hotels, apologised to the court on behalf of the company for the failures to resolve the situation in a timely manner. He said: “The company has never before been subject to enforcement action, and prides itself on having a good working relationship with the local authorities in the areas it operates. We are extremely disappointed the company finds itself in this position.”

He said the action has motivated the company to make improvements to avoid similar situations in the future, and pointed out that all the required work has been completed.

He added: “ The Midland Hotel is a good employer in Bradford, it is important for the city centre. It is important it continues to exist and thrive. It is a significant draw to travellers to the area.”

He pointed out that in the past two years the company had spent over £100,000 on asbestos removal, adding: This shows the company takes this seriously. Even in difficult times the priority is given to spend money where needed.”

He argued that the company had taken action to deal with the asbestos, but that it was delayed due to negotiations with contractors and rising cost estimates provided. But he said the company had admitted there were “unacceptable delays” adding “it took months, and it shouldn’t have done.”

He pointed out that there was no risk to the public, and very low risk to staff.

The sentencing guidelines for the offences are a fine, and this is based on the income of the company being fined.

The court heard that until recently Peel Hotels was operating on an annual profit of £15.5 million. But the Covid pandemic had devastated the industry. Mr Row said the company had recently sold the Cosmopolitan Hotel in Leeds, and two further hotels had gone into liquidation, leaving the company with just six hotels.

He said: “Turnover will never reach those previous heights, as our portfolio has reduced significantly. The situation is dire.”

While the company once employed 440 staff, it now had just 249 employees, and around 150 were currently furloughed.

The hotel made a significant contribution to the local economy, and Peel Hotels had spent £4.8 million on the building since it purchased.

Mr Row told the court the chain was suffering financially even before Covid. A loan to support the business through the pandemic had already been spent, and Peel Hotels would soon need to apply for another loan to get the company past February.

It was hoped the company could weather the storm until Spring, when it may be able to re-group. He added: “I cannot stress enough the peril the company is in in terms of its financial position. It looks like another hotel may have to be sold for the company to continue. The company is not profitable at all - it is making a thumping loss.”

District Judge Richard Clews said: “The Midland Hotel is bricks and mortar, but behind the face of any building there is always a human story. Particularly in a building of this size there is always going to be lurking dangers and the responsibility to control these dangers is even greater when the building is as old as this one.

“It is a significant building in the city centre, a landmark perhaps, and in that respect it is an asset to the city even though it is privately owned and operated.

“It is important to the local economy - many are those who have used it and taken advantage of its services, and been employed to work there in various capacities.

“There is a responsibility that comes with such a building. Although these are corporate offences , perhaps this is a story of human failings.

“There was no deliberate cost cutting, more a failure to keep on top of things. Systems to deal with them weren’t in place. However everything that was wrong has now been put right.”

He pointed out that the company was “ashamed” that it found itself facing these charges.

He said that in the recent past the company had been able to make a profit, but added: “These are very different times, unprecedented times, particularly for the hospitality industry, and I must reflect that in the penalty I impose. I hope the hotel survives, it will be good for Bradford if it did, but these offences cannot be overlooked."

He said that if the company had been as profitable as it had been in recent years, the fine could have reached six figures.

However due to the company’s current financial woes, and the fact that it had pleaded guilty, saving the cost of a trial, he reduced the fine.

Overall the company was fined £24,000, and will have to pay Bradford Council £6,000 costs - less than the £9,260 the Council says it spent on the investigation.

In total it will have to pay £30,000 within a year.