Key Points
- A Hampshire-based company, Willow Services (Southern) Limited, was fined £20,000 after a roofer fell through an unguarded loft hatch in Wimbledon.
- The worker, Mark Smith, was 41 and was working on 13 May 2024 when the incident happened during re-roofing work.
- He stepped onto an unprotected loft hatch, fell about 11 feet, and landed on his back.
- Smith fractured his L1 vertebra and his hip and has been unable to return to work since.
- The Health and Safety Executive said the incident happened because the work at height had not been properly planned and supervised.
- Willow Services (Southern) Limited pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005.
- Westminster Magistrates’ Court fined the company £20,000 and ordered it to pay £5,607 in costs on 30 April 2026.
- The HSE said the incident was “entirely avoidable” and would not have happened if the loft hatch had been identified and protected at the planning stage.
Wimbledon (South London News) May 16, 2026 – A construction company has been fined after a roofer suffered life-changing injuries in what safety regulators described as an entirely avoidable fall from a loft hatch in Wimbledon.
As reported by the Health and Safety Executive, Mark Smith was working for Willow Services (Southern) Limited on 13 May 2024 when he was carrying out re-roofing work on a domestic property in Wimbledon. The 41-year-old had been stripping out internal insulation in the roof space when he stepped onto an unguarded loft hatch that had not been identified or protected. He fell approximately 11 feet to the floor below and landed on his back, resulting in serious injuries.
How serious were the injuries?
Smith fractured his L1 vertebra and his hip, according to the HSE. The regulator said he has been unable to return to work since the incident, and that his employment was later terminated by the company.
That makes the case not just a workplace safety breach, but a long-term personal and professional setback for the worker involved.
Why did the HSE prosecute?
The HSE said its investigation found that Willow Services (Southern) Limited had failed to suitably plan the work at height.
It also said the company did not ensure adequate measures were in place to prevent falls and failed to provide competent supervision of the work. Investigators further found that those overseeing the job did not have the necessary training or experience to safely manage construction-related activities.
As reported by the HSE, the company pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005.
The court imposed a fine of £20,000 and ordered the firm to pay £5,607 in costs at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on 30 April 2026.
What did the regulator say?
The HSE said the fall was preventable and tied directly to poor planning and supervision. In the regulator’s words, the incident was “entirely avoidable” and resulted from a failure to properly plan the work and provide competent supervision.
It added that if the loft hatch had been identified and protected at the planning stage, Mr Smith would not have suffered the injuries.
What does the court case show?
This case underlines how a single missed hazard can cause severe harm on a domestic building site. In this instance, the hazard was not an unusual piece of machinery or a rare structural defect, but an unprotected loft hatch in a roof space.
The prosecution shows that regulators continue to treat failures in basic fall protection as serious breaches when workers are exposed to avoidable danger.
Background to the case
Work at height remains one of the most closely watched areas of construction safety because falls can cause life-changing injuries in seconds.
The Work at Height Regulations 2005 place duties on employers to plan such work properly, make sure fall risks are controlled, and ensure competent supervision is in place. In this case, the HSE said those duties were not met, which is why the company faced prosecution and a substantial fine.
Predicted impact
For construction firms, the case is likely to reinforce the need for tighter site checks, clearer planning, and better supervision before roof work begins. For workers, especially roofers and tradespeople operating in loft spaces, it highlights the importance of identifying floor openings and unguarded hatches before work starts. For clients and householders, the case is a reminder that even small domestic projects can carry serious safety risks if the work is not properly managed.
