10 May 2016 Peter William RICHARDSON · Prevention of Future Deaths report Surrey
View report summary
Concerns raised 7 Failure to record lift tolerance levels for comparison by subsequent examiners View source Failure to record vehicle-lift operator training View source Failure to ensure lift users are appropriately competent to maintain the lift View source Lack of formal guidance on safe tolerances for safety-critical elements of two-post lifts View source Failure to provide guidance on required torque for safety-critical elements of Bendpak two-post lifts View source Use of foreign objects between two-post lift pads and vehicles during lifting View source Failure to provide guidance on safe tolerance levels for supplied two-post lifts View source See 4 more concerns
Actions described in response An action is something this recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised. 1
Action
Issue technical instructions requiring surveyors to record pad-wear tolerance in thorough-examination reports for two-post vehicle lifting tables.
View source
×
AI-generated summary
Peter William RICHARDSON · 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
On 27 September 2015, Peter William Richardson was working beneath a car on a two-post vehicle lift when the car became dislodged and fell onto him, causing fatal head injuries. The substantive concerns included the absence of formal guidance on safe tolerances and torque levels for safety-critical lift components, inadequate recording and training arrangements, and the practice of placing foreign objects between lift pads and vehicles to provide clearance.
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 Hsb Engineering Insurance Services Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to record lift tolerance levels for comparison by subsequent examiners
Wider context from the report “c) Safe tolerance should be considered at a LOLER ‘Thorough Examination’ however there is no guidance to be followed and there is no requirement for such tolerance levels to be recorded and as such the levels are not available to any subsequent examiner .
” 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 Hsb Engineering Insurance Services Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to record vehicle-lift operator training
Wider context from the report “d) Mr Richardson who operated the lift only received training on the specific lift at the point it was installed in 2012. All other users were subsequently trained by him in its use, which was not recorded and all users of the lift were expected to maintain the lift properly.
” 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 Hsb Engineering Insurance Services Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to ensure lift users are appropriately competent to maintain the lift
Wider context from the report “d) Mr Richardson who operated the lift only received training on the specific lift at the point it was installed in 2012. All other users were subsequently trained by him in its use, which was not recorded and all users of the lift were expected to maintain the lift properly .
” 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 Hsb Engineering Insurance Services Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Lack of formal guidance on safe tolerances for safety-critical elements of two-post lifts
Wider context from the report “a) No formal guidance exists as to safe tolerances of safety critical elements of two-post lifts . The Court heard from two HSE witnesses and a ‘Thorough examiner’ who examined the lift for the purposes of complying with LOLER 1988, who gave differing views on what was a safe tolerance or ‘play’ for an extended lift arm . Further, it was accepted that this was an issue of concern to the HSE, but as yet remained to be dealt with.
” 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 Hsb Engineering Insurance Services Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to provide guidance on required torque for safety-critical elements of Bendpak two-post lifts
Wider context from the report “b) The supplier of the Bendpak Lift in the UK, Liftmaster, do not supply guidance as to the required torque for safety critical elements of their two-post lifts and neither do they provide guidance on safe tolerance levels.
” 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 Hsb Engineering Insurance Services Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Use of foreign objects between two-post lift pads and vehicles during lifting
Wider context from the report “e) It is a known practice for a variety of different objects (for example a piece of wood) to be placed on top of the lift pads between the pad and the vehicle when it is lifted in order to provide clearance and to assist with difficult jobs such as removing a car under-shield.
” 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 Hsb Engineering Insurance Services Limited; that does not assign responsibility.
PFD Monitor interpretation Failure to provide guidance on safe tolerance levels for supplied two-post lifts
Wider context from the report “b) The supplier of the Bendpak Lift in the UK, Liftmaster, do not supply guidance as to the required torque for safety critical elements of their two-post lifts and neither do they provide guidance on safe tolerance levels .
” Open source report
×
Source evidence
How this respondent action was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.
PFD Monitor interpretation Issue technical instructions requiring surveyors to record pad-wear tolerance in thorough-examination reports for two-post vehicle lifting tables.
Verbatim wording from the response “Following the recommendations made during the inquest, HSB issued a technical document on the 3rd May 2017 to its engineering surveyors which instructed them to record the pad wear (tolerance) on the report of thorough examination for two post vehicle lifting tables, as suggested in the PFD report.” Source location Peter-Richardson-Response
Open published response
Pin
Request correction
Information checked against published PFD reports and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations