Salon 'concerns' before burning

A teenage girl suffered burns in February

Concerns were raised about an unmanned tanning salon four months before a girl of 14 was badly burnt on a sun bed, a court has heard.

James Hadley, 25, from Resolven, Neath, who owns Lextan salon in Barry, Vale of Glamorgan, has admitted five health and safety charges.

Barry Magistrates Court heard the charges do not relate to the girl, who received 70% burns, but the incident had prompted another inspection.

Sentencing of Hadley was adjourned.

"The combined seriousness of the offences warrants rather more than a financial penalty," said District Judge John Charles who described Hadley's approach to health and safety legislation as "cavalier".

"Suffice it to say the public have to be protected, particularly young persons."

Further inspection

A 14-year-old girl needed hospital treatment for her burns after she visited the salon in February.

Hadley admitted failing to staff premises throughout opening hours, failing to ensure goggles were available for customers' use and failing to ensure sun beds were capped at a maximum 15 minutes exposure.

He also admitted employing a young person without carrying out a risk assessment and making a false statement to the council.

Mr Reynolds asked for two further charges to lie on the file.

Prosecutor Lee Reynolds said that while the charges before the court did not relate to the girl, the incident had prompted a further inspection of the premises.

The salon was unmanned the court has heard

He said health and safety inspectors from Vale of Glamorgan council raised concerns with Hadley about the salon in October 2008, a month before it opened, and January 2009.

Mr Reynolds said the inspector had initially indicated to Hadley that operating an unmanned salon in itself presented hazards and risks over and above those at staffed salons.

The inspector also expressed concern about the possibility of under-age salon users and the lack of means to monitor how long customers spent on the beds.

When the same inspector visited again in January, the majority of his concerns had been acted on, but the premises was unstaffed during the three hours he was there, said Mr Reynolds.

Permanently man

Just days before the girl was injured, a "disgruntled parent" had contacted Hadley about teenagers who were visiting his salon straight after getting off the school bus, the court was told.

When the council was told about the schoolgirl incident, inspectors visited the salon again and asked for the CCTV footage, but Hadley was unable to supply it as the machine was not working.

Tests on one sun bed revealed it could be used for up to 20 minutes at a time and the machine supplying goggles was empty.

When interviewed, Mr Reynolds said Hadley said there was a sign saying "strictly no under-16s" and that the sign was ignored at their own risk.

Hadley said that following the parent's call, he employed someone between peak times at the salon.

He later admitted that this was not put in place until after the incident.

Mr Reynolds said Hadley had now taken the decision to permanently man all his tanning salons.

Defending, Mark Owen said that at the time of the offences, guidance from the Health and Safety Executive was silent on unmanned tanning salons.

He said his client, who has another six salons visited by 1,000 customers a week during busy times, was "greatly troubled" by the prosecution.

Sentencing was adjourned until 8 December for reports to be prepared.