Dear Madam, HSE Response to Regulation 28 Prevention of Future Deaths Notification I refer to the recent inquest into the death of Brody O’Brien and your above notification. HSE does not have any enforcement responsibility for the disused mill as there is no ongoing work activity. However, the mill building is bordered on two sides by a site under the control of Spenside Developments Ltd which is enforced by HSE. We inspected the site in November 2025 and took enforcement action with regard to improvements to site security. A further visit was made on 17th March 2026 to re-assess site security and the necessary improvements to the site fencing have been made. Liaison with legal and planning representatives from Rossendale Borough Council took place to share concerns and ensure that both organisations are working together in an effective and cooperative manner. Representatives from Rossendale Borough Council were in attendance on 17th March and advice has been shared with regard to further securing access to the mill building. Please let me know if you have any queries with regard to the above.

Dear Coroner Mather

RE: Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths – Brody O’Brien

I write in response to the above and to outline the action taken by the Council to date in relation to access to Sunnyside Works.

As requested, a copy of the report was sent to the owner of Sunnyside Works, together with a s29 Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982. This notice required to secure the building by either boarding all openings accessible from ground level or by provision of perimeter fencing to prevent access.

informed the Council that his access to the land has been denied and prevented by the owner of the wider Albert Mill site and was therefore unable to comply with the notice. He further advises that an injunction application is due to be heard in Manchester on 7th April relating to the reinstatement of access and in the event that this is granted and access is reinstated, he will complete the works.

The Council has not accepted this position. The Council has been in communication with the owner of the Albert Mill site and they have confirmed that they are agreeable to taking access over their land to his property in order to carry out the securing of the building. This has been relayed to but he does not accept that access is suitable or safe. This is also not accepted by the Council.

The Council has been working alongside of the Health and Safety Executive and officers have spoken with him both over the telephone and in person on site. The HSE has no involvement with Sunnyside Works as this does not form part of the active site but has been very helpful in offering advice and assistance as to safety measures that could be taken on site.

LEGAL SERVICES

The Business Centre, Futures Park, Bacup OL13 0BB Website: www.rossendale.gov.uk

Name: THE COUNCIL DOES NOT ACCEPT SERVICE OF DOCUMENTS BY E-MAIL

Our reference: Your reference: Brody O’Brien

CLB /Z26-001449/00154253

The Council and its contractor attended on site during a coordinated visit with the HSE and the owner of Albert Mill with a view to obtaining quotes to carry out the securing works in default. All were in agreement that the site can be accessed safely in order for the works to be carried out albeit in a suitable vehicle.

The Council has continued to liaise with but he maintains his position that he is presently unable to take access to do the works. The Council has given him until 7th April to carry out the works and in the event that he fails to do so, the Council’s contractor will be instructed to do the works and a land charge will be placed on the land until the monies are recovered from . He has been made aware of the likely costs of this which will include an administration fee for officers having to organise this. Officers have stressed the importance of this matter, particularly given the sad circumstances that this has arisen from, but this does not appear to have been given much regard by and the Council is not satisfied that he has a reasonable intention to carry out the works.

The injunction may not be granted and even if it is, it may take some time for the matter to be fully resolved. relies on this in his attempt to demonstrate that he is prevented from taking the required steps and does not appear to take on board the need to prevent access to his building in order to prevent future deaths which is disappointing. The Council has offered to act as mediator between the two land owners but again, has not taken this up. The access issue has been a long running issue and the Council was aware of this when it was involved with the potential CPO of the site a number of years ago.

The Council is also taking some additional steps to assist in the prevention of access by the removal of some trees on Council owned land in close proximity to the building and looking how further access from the footpath could be prevented but this would have to take into account current rights of way etc. The owner of the wider Albert Mill site has been helpful in his approach and has confirmed that we can take access over the land; we have certain rights of access in any event but this has been appreciated. The Council will also be requesting that they also take some action on their land to assist in the prevention of access and to this end the Council will keep you informed.

I hope this is satisfactory and I will continue to keep you updated and confirm when the works are complete. If you do have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact me.