Builder brings 12 year old daughter to work

[TinyBuddhettes]

Childcare issues, I get it. This contractor/builder guy is doing up our drive. His daughter mostly stays in his van but yesterday I could see that she was operating the mini digger while he was recording her. This wasn't just a couple of minutes for a photo, it went on for maybe an hour. The two of them were frolicking and being quite stupid really. I was in disbelief watching from inside the house. Our drive is now all digged up and I don't want any awkwardness or the potential of him not finishing the job. Anyone know where we stand with the law? Can we say that from a legal point of view we do not consent to an under 16 being withing the bounds of our property at any point?

@TinyBuddhettes what’s the update?

This his how kids should be brought up. My teen ds has been making a small fortune (to him) over the holidays by working for local farmers - mowing, ploughing etc. Farm kids are so much more grown up, independent and motivated than townie kids.

Oh, come on. She's twelve and her father is supposed to be working.

He is, on bringing up a capable and knowledgeable child. Society has lost its way if it thinks only paid jobs are important. That's capitalism and short-term thinking talking.

It really isn't. I do agree re paid jobs, but this guy's supposed to be doing his paid job and isn't. What does that teach about work ethics? Not setting a good example imo.

There's a whole ton of ways to bring up a capable and knowledgeable child - on one's own time, not an employer's.

So he’s bringing his DD to work, allowing her to play on machinery and increasing the risk of an accident happening on OP’s property, which she would almost certainly be held liable for, because he would have invalidated any insurance he had himself by allowing DD to play on said machinery. That’s not bringing up a capable and knowledgeable child, that’s taking the piss out of the person paying you for the work you’re not doing while you’re playing with your child on their time.

This is not how insurance works - he's either liable or not. If he's liable then his insurance being invalid means any losses come out of his business. If he's not liable then his insurance position is irrelevant.

There is no obligation for the OP to provide access to a toilet - it’s a private contract. If the contractor had employees working on the site and OP refused access, then the contractor can provide a portaloo and charge it to her. We have a gardener who comes in for a full afternoon once a month and he always uses the facilities at a nearby cafe - l did offer but this is his preference.

OP could still be liable for accidents if even if the contractor is directly responsible for his DD’s actions. As the landowner, OP has a duty of care to ensure the safety of anyone on her property. Allowing an untrained 12-year-old to operate heavy machinery significantly increases the risk of accidents and injuries, and OP could be liable for failing to maintain a safe environment. The fact that she has seen what the contractor is doing and has not stepped in to stop it could contribute to her liability if there was an accident. If the contractor doesn’t have suitable insurance he would likely try to claim on OP’s home insurance and when they inevitably reject the claim, he could sue.

I don't think it's correct that the OP has responsibility for the work site. If she is then she's equally up shit creek if the adult builder has an accident. Why don't we all need construction site insurance every time we have work done at our homes? Am I meant to be generally supervising works to ensure safe practice? Do I need to know all the working at height rules when I get my roof done so I can't be held liable having seen what they were doing and not stepped in to stop them?

You can guarantee all the people on here saying to leave them to it but would be up in arms if it happened to them 🤣 This builder is taking the piss and potentially putting his daughter at risk on OP’s property, of course she shouldn’t be offering to entertain his daughter! This is the same as the cleaner thread, I think sometimes people write batshit responses just to see what they can get away with 🙄

The adult builder should be insured and there’s no reason it wouldn’t pay out in the event of a genuine accident - which it wouldn’t if it came to light he was playing with his child on the job site when the accident happened. The landowner - OP - has general a duty of care to anyone on her land and the fact that she has observed something potentially dangerous and hasn’t stopped it could make her liable. It’s not about having the knowledge to supervise working practices - bringing your child on to a job site and allowing them to play on dangerous machinery is well outside working practices.

Can you show what you are using to back up the statement that a construction contract which fails to provide toilets provides legal protection to the contracting party for breach of health and safety legistation?

You do need to should have insurance in place when having work done which is why most (if not all) home insurance policy have a clause about how you must inform your insurance company when you are having works done.
The insurance company may mitigate their risk by having you check the insurance coverage if any provided by the worker and your contract if you have one.

And yes under the current legislation the home owner can be held liable for the H&S on the work site if you have not contracted that out to a competent party. Its a one size fits all to catch rogue DIYers as well as massive companies because construction continues to be one of the biggest killers in the UK

https://press.hse.gov.uk/2025/07/02/latest-annual-work-related-fatalities-published/

The industries with the highest number of deaths were construction (35) and agriculture, forestry and fishing (23). Of all main industry sectors, agriculture, forestry and fishing continues to have the highest rate of fatal injury per 100,000 workers followed by waste and recycling.
The most common cause of fatal injuries continues to be falls from a height (35), representing over a quarter of worker deaths in 2024/25.
A further 92 people who were not at work were killed in work-related incidents in 2024/25. This refers to members of the public who were in a workplace but were not working themselves.

And deaths
https://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/fatals-overview.htm

And I am reminded of the hotel who was held liable for lack of H&S training when a man sat Cartoon Style on the branch he was sawing off a tree and lost to gravity.

It’s not a breach of health and safety law if the contractor himself provides the toilet facilities - eg a portaloo or similar. He would be entitled to charge OP for this as part of the work.

And I am reminded of the hotel who was held liable for lack of H&S training when a man sat Cartoon Style on the branch he was sawing off a tree and lost to gravity

Was he an employee though?

Clearly in this instance no toilet was paid for nor provided.

TBH
He was a gardner/groundskeeper but I cant remember if he was directly employed or if the circumstance of his contract was ruled to be a contract of employment.
I suspect he was directly employed.

I just have a mental picture of the Hotel now playing looney tunes clips to demo how to not sit on a branch.

Have you read the statistics re farm work? Plus,have you read any of this thread?

True. But it sounds like he’s the only one working, so unless he complains not much to be done. I don’t see the problem with providing access myself but some people are funny about their toilets !!

I agree but in terms the transfer of responsibility what the contract covers and fails to cover indicates the OP may have failed to transfer liability and control over the work area to the company/sole trader.
And the OP is betting her house on that.

You can guarantee all the people on here saying to leave them to it but would be up in arms if it happened to them

And if she'd said she was paying him cash in hand there'd be howls of outrage.

OP has arranged cover for her own children as both her and her husband work from home so having made these arrangements why should they then been distracted with someone else’s child.