Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Jonathan Sandler CMIOSH
Is the local authority correct in their assessmet which states that door mats place at fire exits are a tripping hazard, or are they OTT?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Nigel Lumb
Hello
They may well be a hazard but doubt if they are a significant risk (there is a diffrence)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By J Knight
From what I heard this is a story about doormats in common areas in multi-storey rented housing, rather than say residential accommodation. Thoroughly OTT, and fortunately the Council picked the right person to respond on their behalf and he said as much,
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Merv Newman
Balance of risk : if people can't wipe their feet they may slip and fall. A risk assessment would, I think, show the higher priority.
Hang about. Why do you need doormats at your fire exits ? Surely the people using them will only be on their way OUT into the rain ? Hence the word "exit"
Just ignore me.
Merv
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Fornhelper
I would tend to agree with Nigel on this one. Although, I suppose, mats could be classed as 'potential trip hazards' they would hardly be classed as a significant risk as they are essentially 'designed for purpose'.
The benefits they provide in reducing the risk of slips and falls due to wet floors, mud, dirt etc being brought indoors would, I suggest, far outweigh any concerns about trip hazards (accepting that they are in good condition of course).
In my opinion the LA are being way OTT on this one.
Regards
FH
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mike Grey
Bristol City Council have banned the use of door mats outside all council owned flats as they are a trip hazard, see link. Anyone from Bristol City Council wish to give us the true picture?
http://www.thisisbristol...rPk=83726&pNodeId=144912
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Fornhelper
Beat me to it there Merv !!! :)
FH
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Robert K Lewis
My first response, whilst whiling away the time in a grid-locked Huddersfield this morning due to an M62 accident, was to wonder what the definition of a doormat was in Bristol.
The 25mm thick coconut fibre variety certainly has no place in an escape corridor BUT the thin rubber backed dust mat, as seen in most public and commercial buildings is not a significant hazard. Methinks this is an example of an assessor who fails to ensure all terminology is clearly defined.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Jonathan Sandler CMIOSH
has anybody thought about the cost implication of this decission,, also under occupiers lib? although the LA has looked at hmo, could there be a knock on effect into commercial properties, i.e. cinemas, hotels, hospitals etc?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By J Knight
I heard this on Radio 2 (Ken Bruce, not the togmeister) and the response from Bristol was that this sort of restriction might be appropriate in sheltered accommodation or res. care, but that they would be revising their assessment in this case, as it was probably not approriate in council housing,
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.