Rank: Super forum user 
|
I'm sorry, but....
Had a slip on external steps that lead into a building. Over 7 day injury but not sure whether reportable.
Enquired as to whether it was a simple loss of footing or a defect in steps. It's been established that steps do not conforn to Building Regs Part K but this particular building is very old.
I vaguely recall something in Welfare Regs that says anything before 19?? is not expected to comply. Can't see it in current version.
Am I going mad? Should I just go ahead and report anyway?
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
safetyamateur wrote:I'm sorry, but....
Had a slip on external steps that lead into a building. Over 7 day injury but not sure whether reportable.
Enquired as to whether it was a simple loss of footing or a defect in steps. It's been established that steps do not conforn to Building Regs Part K but this particular building is very old.
I vaguely recall something in Welfare Regs that says anything before 19?? is not expected to comply. Can't see it in current version.
Am I going mad? Should I just go ahead and report anyway?
Cheers I would just report the injury......its RIDDOR you want to comply with, not Welfare Regs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
My opinion is that if they are not constructed to Building Regs does not make them automatically "defective"
If there are no defects on the stairs (Nosing missing, carpet ripped, cracks or dips on tread or poor lighting etc) and it was just a missed footing I would not report. This was agreed with an ex-HSE inspector - apply the three criteria questions for it to be regarded as a RIDDOR.
Im sure there will be differeing opinions as is usually the case with these RIDDOR queries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
I know! RIDDOR is so much simpler now ;-0
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Sorry, ignore post above, it went in the wrong thread. Doh!
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
SW wrote:My opinion is that if they are not constructed to Building Regs does not make them automatically "defective"
If there are no defects on the stairs (Nosing missing, carpet ripped, cracks or dips on tread or poor lighting etc) and it was just a missed footing I would not report. This was agreed with an ex-HSE inspector - apply the three criteria questions for it to be regarded as a RIDDOR.
Im sure there will be differeing opinions as is usually the case with these RIDDOR queries. This is where I'm coming from, SW. I've got Estates people getting quotes to make them Part K-compliant when [if my addled memory on that retro qualification is valid] it may well be a waste of money. There must be something that prevents us ripping out old stuff simply to comply with current standards
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
British Standards are not the law and Building Regs cannot be applied retrospectively. Assuming there are no defects as mentioned above, provided the stairs complied with the standards in place at the time of construction no further action is necessary. That said, have there been other similar incidents which might suggest there's a problem?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Don't report, make a note against your investigation, if the steps are in good condition then not meeting part K which it doesn't need to given it's not retrospective is irrelevant unless any of the three criteria played a significant part, what you have provided suggests not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.