An electrician who managed the project to build his new family home himself didn't realise the 'enormity of the task and the weight of responsibility' - and found himself in the court following the death of a worker who fell from the roof.
Married father-of-two Roy Staunton, 45, took charge of the development after he and his wife won planning permission to squeeze the property onto a plot next door to their home on a cul-de-sac in Hale, Trafford.
Tragedy struck after Staunton, a self-employed electrician, took down a scaffolding frame erected around a one-storey 'snug' on the side of the development in the mistaken belief it was safe for workmen to tile the roof.
READ MORE: Teachers at high school go on strike days after 200 parents also launch petition
Tony Geldard, 63, slipped and fell, landing on a set of a scaffolding boards and poles below.
He fractured his spinal cord and was left with severe brain damage. He died three days later in hospital.
Inquiries revealed the fixed scaffolding frame surrounding the snug had been dismantled by Staunton in the days before the tragedy after another roofer contracted to work on the site said he didn't think it was needed.
Mr Geldard's widow has since had to sell their family home - and their daughter's.
At Minshull Street Crown Court, Staunton, of Egerton Drive, Hale, admitted contravening health and safety rules set out by the Work at Height Regulations 2005 - an offence under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act.
He was sentenced to eight months, suspended for two years, and was ordered to pay £16,529 costs.
Earlier, the court heard the incident happened on July 18, 2017.
Mr Geldard - a grandfather described as a 'compulsive workaholic, who had been working as a roofer since he was 16 - had been sub-contracted to work on the development.
During the project, Staunton consulted an architect and a health and safety advisor about the build, but oversaw operations himself.
Prosecuting, Rosalind Emsley-Smith said: "As the principal contractor, Mr Staunton had a responsibility to control the risks from work being undertaken at height and had to ensure that no one was in a position to work at height without adequate measures being in place to prevent a fall.
"But the scaffold around the snug area was apparently removed after the defendant had discussed the position with the contracted roofer, who said he could safely undertake tiling on the remaining unfinished single storey section of the roof area without fixed scaffold in place.
"[The contracted roofer] was of the view a mobile scaffold would be sufficient and that he could use his own.
"Mr Staunton removed the fixed scaffolding around the snug because he needed to create an access route in order to build a retaining wall.
"Mr Geldard, who was subcontracted, was carrying out roof work to the snug when he fell a distance of about 2.6 metres from the roof.
"As the scaffolding that had been in place at the rear of the property had been removed, there was nothing in place to protect him.
"Parts of the scaffolding had been left on the ground and Mr Geldard landed on scaffolding boards and tubes.
"Paramedics arrived and performed CPR at the scene, although they were hampered by the scaffolding tubes underneath Mr Geldard.
"The reason why Mr Geldard fell from the roof is uncertain.
"His health difficulties may have been part of the cause, but the defendant accepts that whatever lead to the fall, the lack of scaffolding around the snug area was a cause of Mr Geldard’s death.
"The work was not appropriately planned and even if the subcontractor had been informed that the tower scaffolding was to be used as an alternative to fixed scaffolding, tower scaffolding was an inadequate control measure and would not have prevented this fall from height.
"Whatever caused Mr Geldard to fall from the roof, the reality of the situation is that scaffolding should have been in place that would have prevented him from falling a height likely to cause him harm.
"It wasn’t in place and the fall caused significant injuries from which he died. The failure to have adequate measures in place to prevent a fall are therefore a significant cause of actual harm in this case."
In a statement, Mr Geldard's widow Karen said: "I just miss him.
"We have lost everything... he was one in a million.
"We have had to sell my house and my daughters house after what happened."
Staunton gave no comment when interviewed by police.
In mitigation, Carl Hargan said: "This defendant cannot imagine the pain the family are going through. He never intended to hurt anyone.
"It is not a case of reckless behaviour on his part. There has been a significant error of judgement. His intention was to build his own family home and he had undertaken the appropriate measures to complete a self build.
"It was not a cowboy operation. He had employed a health and safety consultant and he has been a respected electrician for many years. The fact is maybe he took on too much.
"He has since returned to work part time as a self-employed electrician, but now he has had an experience that will stay with him for the rest of his life, never forgetting his actions led to Mr Geldard’s death.
"He says it is the most impactful trauma he has ever experienced. It is still overwhelming for him.
"He accepts he was naïve with the enormity of the task and the weight of responsibility. He is a hardworking man trying to do the best for his family.
"He is the primary carer for his two daughters. His wife is the main breadwinner in the house.
"He provides emotional support.''
Sentencing, Judge Angela Nield told Staunton: "Tony was a loving and much-loved partner, husband, father and grandfather.
"He loved spending time with his family. He was a compulsive workaholic and enjoyed nothing more than working seven days a week.
"His widow says he was at his happiest when he was working.
"He had been a roofer since he was 16 working on all sorts of projects.
"His widow describes how he had always looked after his own health and describes the catastrophic impact this has had on her and the rest of the family.
"It has struck her not only emotionally, but also financially. The strain led to the sale of her and her daughters home as they were not able to deal with repairs.
"I know you will understand the loss she has suffered, even though you cannot begin to imagine the pain that accompanies that loss.
"There is nothing that can compensate them for their loss.
"You had a consultation from a trusted architect before embarking on your role as principal contractor, but you did not realise the enormity of the task you had taken on. The ultimate responsibility falls to you.
"Had the work been properly planned, then the scaffolding would not have been removed. Mr Geldard accessed the roof by a ladder and the tragic consequences of that are stark.
"This has comprehensively destroyed the lives of two families."
Staunton admitted contravening health and safety regulations set out by the Work at Height Regulations, in that he 'failed to ensure that work at height at Egerton Drive, Hale, was properly planned, appropriately supervised and carried out in a manner which was so far as reasonably practicable safe'.
He was guilty under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act by breaching the regulations.
Following the hearing, Mr Geldard's partner Karen told the Manchester Evening News: "He was one in a million, loved by all who knew him.
"He is dearly missed."
