Recipient

Dig Safe Suction Excavations Ltd

Pin Request correction

First report 10 Aug 2016•Latest report 10 Aug 2016

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Private and voluntary organisations · Private limited company. This page brings together reports naming this recipient and response statements clearly connected to concerns raised in those reports.

Reports
1

Naming this recipient

Published responses
0%

Found for named reports

Concerns addressed
0

Across all linked responses

Stated actions
0

Described in responses

Reports over time

Reports over time

Reports naming this recipient by issue year.

Evidence profile

Report topics

Share of this recipient’s reports compared with all other recipients.

0%published responses found
0stated actions described

Topic comparisons are not available in the current evidence snapshot.

Concerns and recipient responses

Statements from Dig Safe Suction Excavations Ltd linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Surrey

    AI-generated summary

    Ben Andrew Collins · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Ben Andrew Collins was trapped and killed while using a suction excavation machine to excavate a trench beside the M3 Motorway on 27 July 2015. The inquest recorded positional asphyxia, fractured ribs and a fractured femur, with the jury concluding accidental death. Concerns included inadequate emergency operating knowledge and training, the absence of HSE guidance on suction excavation equipment, and servicing and documentation of control panels.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Dig Safe Suction Excavations Ltd; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of defined servicing intervals for Suction Excavation control panels

    Wider context from the report

    “During the course of the inquest the evidence revealed that upon finding Mr Collins in the trench, those present had no knowledge of how to operate the Suction Excavator in order to release Mr Collins. Digsafe Excavations Ltd provided one person with knowledge of how to operate the excavator with an expectation that a second man would be provided by whosoever contracted with them. That person however would not know how to operate the Suction Excavator in an emergency or be fully trained in its use. Further there is no HSE guidance covering; a) the use of a Suction Excavation machine, b) training for such use, c) the provision of a fully trained second man, d) the regularity of servicing of control panels. Digsafe Suction Excavation Ltd give consideration to the provision of a second man by them at each excavation who is fully trained in the operation of the Suction Excavator and associated equipment such as an air-lance. The HSE give consideration to the provisions of guidance regarding training and the use of suction excavation equipment including a recommendation for the provision of a second man fully trained to use the Suction Excavator and associated equipment, regular servicing of remote controllers together with the proper documentation of such. ”
    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Dig Safe Suction Excavations Ltd; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of HSE guidance on the use of Suction Excavation machines

    Wider context from the report

    “During the course of the inquest the evidence revealed that upon finding Mr Collins in the trench, those present had no knowledge of how to operate the Suction Excavator in order to release Mr Collins. Digsafe Excavations Ltd provided one person with knowledge of how to operate the excavator with an expectation that a second man would be provided by whosoever contracted with them. That person however would not know how to operate the Suction Excavator in an emergency or be fully trained in its use. Further there is no HSE guidance covering; a) the use of a Suction Excavation machine, b) training for such use, c) the provision of a fully trained second man, d) the regularity of servicing of control panels. Digsafe Suction Excavation Ltd give consideration to the provision of a second man by them at each excavation who is fully trained in the operation of the Suction Excavator and associated equipment such as an air-lance. The HSE give consideration to the provisions of guidance regarding training and the use of suction excavation equipment including a recommendation for the provision of a second man fully trained to use the Suction Excavator and associated equipment, regular servicing of remote controllers together with the proper documentation of such. ”
    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Dig Safe Suction Excavations Ltd; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to ensure personnel are trained to operate Suction Excavation equipment in emergencies

    Wider context from the report

    “During the course of the inquest the evidence revealed that upon finding Mr Collins in the trench, those present had no knowledge of how to operate the Suction Excavator in order to release Mr Collins. Digsafe Excavations Ltd provided one person with knowledge of how to operate the excavator with an expectation that a second man would be provided by whosoever contracted with them. That person however would not know how to operate the Suction Excavator in an emergency or be fully trained in its use. Further there is no HSE guidance covering; a) the use of a Suction Excavation machine, b) training for such use, c) the provision of a fully trained second man, d) the regularity of servicing of control panels. Digsafe Suction Excavation Ltd give consideration to the provision of a second man by them at each excavation who is fully trained in the operation of the Suction Excavator and associated equipment such as an air-lance. The HSE give consideration to the provisions of guidance regarding training and the use of suction excavation equipment including a recommendation for the provision of a second man fully trained to use the Suction Excavator and associated equipment, regular servicing of remote controllers together with the proper documentation of such. ”
    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. The report was sent to Dig Safe Suction Excavations Ltd; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to provide a fully trained second operator at each excavation

    Wider context from the report

    “During the course of the inquest the evidence revealed that upon finding Mr Collins in the trench, those present had no knowledge of how to operate the Suction Excavator in order to release Mr Collins. Digsafe Excavations Ltd provided one person with knowledge of how to operate the excavator with an expectation that a second man would be provided by whosoever contracted with them. That person however would not know how to operate the Suction Excavator in an emergency or be fully trained in its use. Further there is no HSE guidance covering; a) the use of a Suction Excavation machine, b) training for such use, c) the provision of a fully trained second man, d) the regularity of servicing of control panels. Digsafe Suction Excavation Ltd give consideration to the provision of a second man by them at each excavation who is fully trained in the operation of the Suction Excavator and associated equipment such as an air-lance. The HSE give consideration to the provisions of guidance regarding training and the use of suction excavation equipment including a recommendation for the provision of a second man fully trained to use the Suction Excavator and associated equipment, regular servicing of remote controllers together with the proper documentation of such. ”
    Open source report
Back to top

Published response patterns

Compared with other recipients in reports included in PFD Monitor

Describes published response evidence, not performance.

Published responses found

0%
0%All other recipients 58%
0%100%

How actions were described at the time

This respondent
All other recipients
47%25%27%<1%<1%
  • Completed
  • In progress
  • Planned
  • Unclear
  • Partially completed

Statuses reflect what recipients said at the time. PFD Monitor does not verify whether actions happened.

Types of action described in responses

Percentages use all actions described by each group. An action may have more than one type, so percentages do not total 100%.

Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026