Recipient

Glass and Glazing Federation

Pin Request correction

First report 13 Mar 2017•Latest report 13 Mar 2017

Recipient record

Reports, concerns and published responses

Private and voluntary organisations · Trade association. 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 Glass and Glazing Federation linked to the concerns in each report. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. Inner West London

    AI-generated summary

    Andrew Terrance John Lownes · 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

    Andrew Terrance John Lownes was fatally injured on 5 June 2015 when a glass curtain window unit toppled from a transport stillage while he was working on the 17th floor of a construction site in London. The report identified concerns that the consignment lacked written unloading instructions and that the complex banding arrangements made it difficult to identify how the units were secured, creating a risk that a heavy unit could fall during unloading.

    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 Glass and Glazing Federation; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of unloading instructions identifying the function and route of load-securing bands

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The consignment of GCWUs which arrived on site from a factory in Switzerland was not accompanied by written unloading instructions, despite: • Containing two GCWUs each weighing around 600kg • The narrow nature of GCWUs -- which meant they were likely to fall if not adequately secured to the transport stillage at all times. • The relatively complex nature of the banding arrangements which secured the GCWUs to the transport stillage, involving some bands which were around the individual GCWU alone, others which lashed a particular GCWU to the stillage and others which sought to bind the entire consignment. Some of the bands lay positioned on top of other bands which served a different purpose. The entire load was shrink wrapped which added to the difficulty of identifying the function and route of a particular band around the load. In consequence, it was not obvious to those unloading the consignment which band served which purpose. This gave rise to a risk that in the course of unloading a band might be cut inadvertently resulting in the fall of a heavy GCWU. Workers in the vicinity could be in a position of jeopardy, as was the case here. Evidence was taken from an expert witness who had considerable experience in construction site management. He said when he examined an identical consignment after the tragedy it took him over an hour to work out the function of the multiple bands placed on the consignment. 2. Although not relevant to the Inquest into Mr Lownes’ death, it is pertinent in my judgment, to refer to another Inquest which I conducted in Leeds in 2009 involving the death of Alan Fletcher, a man aged 59 who sustained fatal crush injuries whilst unloading a container of GCWUs in Leeds. Although that incident involved goods shipped in a container from the UAE rather than on a stillage, there are common features between the two cases: ➢ The absence of unloading instructions ➢ Tall, heavy, narrow based items which have the potential to cause harm if not secured at all times. ”
    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 Glass and Glazing Federation; that does not assign responsibility.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to keep tall, heavy, narrow-based GCWUs secured at all times

    Wider context from the report

    “1. The consignment of GCWUs which arrived on site from a factory in Switzerland was not accompanied by written unloading instructions, despite: • Containing two GCWUs each weighing around 600kg • The narrow nature of GCWUs -- which meant they were likely to fall if not adequately secured to the transport stillage at all times. • The relatively complex nature of the banding arrangements which secured the GCWUs to the transport stillage, involving some bands which were around the individual GCWU alone, others which lashed a particular GCWU to the stillage and others which sought to bind the entire consignment. Some of the bands lay positioned on top of other bands which served a different purpose. The entire load was shrink wrapped which added to the difficulty of identifying the function and route of a particular band around the load. In consequence, it was not obvious to those unloading the consignment which band served which purpose. This gave rise to a risk that in the course of unloading a band might be cut inadvertently resulting in the fall of a heavy GCWU. Workers in the vicinity could be in a position of jeopardy, as was the case here. Evidence was taken from an expert witness who had considerable experience in construction site management. He said when he examined an identical consignment after the tragedy it took him over an hour to work out the function of the multiple bands placed on the consignment. 2. Although not relevant to the Inquest into Mr Lownes’ death, it is pertinent in my judgment, to refer to another Inquest which I conducted in Leeds in 2009 involving the death of Alan Fletcher, a man aged 59 who sustained fatal crush injuries whilst unloading a container of GCWUs in Leeds. Although that incident involved goods shipped in a container from the UAE rather than on a stillage, there are common features between the two cases: ➢ The absence of unloading instructions ➢ Tall, heavy, narrow based items which have the potential to cause harm if not secured at all times. ”
    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