Did IOSH pick up on this conkers bonkers story. http://www.thisissomerse...7183-detail/article.html David

Have to agree with Ron on this one, perfectly acceptable to close until a permanent solution is found, imagine the chaos if there was a fire and the general public were trying to get out through a hatch?

Does bakelite burn? His asbestos register must make interesting reading!

The only bonkers part of this story is the complaint from the business owner. If the building (as reported) needs two extra staircases, then it must be woefully non compliant - travel distance wise- and he is lucky not to have had a prohibition notice served on the upper floor Mind you, I have reservations about the way this press story is presented as the reporting is a little suspect or poorly researched. The mention that Britain's bulging waistlines is the reason for the non acceptance of the hatch is clearly nonsense. This is yet another story where the enforcing authority are damned whatever they do. The same news rag would have probably mounted a 'campaign' if a serious or loss of life fire had occurred here and been very critical of the fire service for missing the risk

I would like to have thought we would be looking at ways of enabling them to operate rather than leave the status quo?