Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
kltodd  
#1 Posted : 02 January 2010 22:13:20(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
kltodd

Hello all,

A poser about construction work on farmhouses. I'm clear about the position on buildings other than the farmhouse, but a little stuck about work on the farmhouse. HSE make it clear that CDM client duties do not apply to work carried out on the farmhouse, as it is the farmer's domestic dwelling. I'm not sure I entirely agree with this as a) the farm business is run from the farmhouse and b) the costs of any such construction work would no doubt be paid out of the farm accounts.

I can't get my head around the "domestic client" bit. I don't think a farmer is as he's at work, but given the above it's a bit blurry.

If I am a farmer having construction work done on my farmhouse, what legal duties do / do not apply to me? Do we assume I am an employer engaging contractors and therefore all the relevant safety legislation applies (HSWA S3, Management Regs, etc); or, do we assume that I am purely a domestic client and that I only owe a common law duty of care (Occupiers Liability etc), etc.

Regards,
KT
firesafety101  
#2 Posted : 03 January 2010 11:57:07(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

Hi, I work from home, self employed safety consultant etc. I use a study with PC equipment etc. and the insurance company are aware etc.

When I have work done by contractors I am a domestic client therefore CDM does not apply.

The farmer works from his home but his work is not inside the house apart from accounts etc. (I assume)? Therefore he is a domestic client as far as CDM is concerned.

I would ask however that if you really feel that CDM should apply why not go for it and incur all additional costs of CDM duty holders and pass on those costs to the farmer, I'm sure he won't appreciate it especially as HSE have advised to the contrary.

A few years ago I was involved in a CDM project where a farmer was having a house built for his son, that was a CDM project as it was a new building and not the farmer's domestic dwelling.
firesafety101  
#3 Posted : 03 January 2010 11:58:15(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

Further, CDM does apply to the domestic client as far as contractor's health and safety is concerned, it is only the notifiable bit that doesn't.
kltodd  
#4 Posted : 03 January 2010 16:04:42(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
kltodd

Hi Chris,

Thanks for that. You'll be glad to hear there is no farmer so no-one will have any costs - it was something I was trying to get my head around.

I did also think about Para 31 in L144.

KT
Canopener  
#5 Posted : 03 January 2010 18:49:46(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Canopener

KT, I think you raise an interesting point i.e. is the farmer in respect of his ‘farmhouse‘ really a domestic client? The SI interprets what a client is but not specifically what a domestic client is and the ACoP doesn’t help all that much. I take Chris’s point about his own situation, but there are farmhouses and farmhouses. In some farmhouses, the domestic use of the property is often pretty secondary to the use of the property for the running of the business.

The other thing is that you haven’t clarified or been asked to clarify is whether the farmer is a tenant farmer or an owner occupier. If the former and the work is being done by the landlord then I think that changes the situation and I would argue that the domestic client scenario no longer applies and that subsequently the client duties would apply.

Re #3 “Further, CDM does apply to the domestic client as far as contractor's health and safety is concerned, it is only the notifiable bit that doesn't” - could I suggest a quick look at the last sentence of para 28 of the ACoP http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/l144.pdf
Canopener  
#6 Posted : 03 January 2010 19:11:37(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Canopener

KT - if I could add, also see para 29 - interesting wording!
kltodd  
#7 Posted : 03 January 2010 21:42:21(UTC)
Rank: New forum user
kltodd

Thanks Phil - Para 29 added to my confusion. I get what they are saying with the shop example, and in that instance the "shop" bit and the "residential bit" although within the one building are usually clearly separated (but again in practice I bet the entire property is listed as an asset on the balance sheet and that the works would be paid for by the business account, but I suppose tax legislation and safety legislation are 2 entirely different matters!).

KT
User is suspended until 03/02/2041 16:43:28(UTC) IanBlenkharn  
#8 Posted : 04 January 2010 07:25:24(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
IanBlenkharn

Rather than the usual search for loopholes and tongue-in-cheer interpretation of some legislative framework and its associated guide that is really not open to such catholic interpretation, should not common sense prevail?

If the work is to focus on bedrooms and kitchen it is domestic, and if on embedded office accommmodation then it is toward commercial.

That's the way my insurance company see it, and we have never had a disagreement about the split of fees or rates for cover.

Ian
Canopener  
#9 Posted : 04 January 2010 20:22:35(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Canopener

I am not quit so sure if the 'split' is quite that simple. As I have tried to point out in one part of my post, if there is a landlord/tenant relationship (which has yet to be established), even work on bedrooms and kitchens would come under the regs
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.