Posted By tina I am dealing with an incident in which rolls of carpet have fallen onto a customer. (Their is a debate on who made them fall) Although ideally we would like carpets in the upright condition chained/roped to the wall, there is no Prescriptive legislation. (The owner believe the way they store is normal)Any one have any case law to show MHSW or HASAW 74 requires upright carpets to be temporary fixed in place at all times.

Posted By James M Tina Yes there is specific legislation. The HSW Act 1974 requires employers to prevent injury to those NOT in their employment (members of the public). Therefore if an accident has occurred and someone has been injured the following must apply: The risk assessment was insufficient and not suitable The management process to protect members of the public failed What more do you need to do to justify implementing new control measures or does the MD like giving his profits away in unnecessary claims. Act now or pay later Good luck Jim

Posted By tina Thanks for that info. I know the HASA applies to none employees. However the employer is stating that the carpets did not fall, they must have been pulled by the injured parties for compo. The employees back up this statement stating that no carpets have ever fallen in the last 20 years. However I still believe relying on storing carpets vertically with a tilt of 0.5m at the base and no ties, is insufficient, but I can’t prove it. I also believe the customers, that they fell, but action must be based on facts and at the moment I only have the word of the customer and employers.

Posted By David A Jones Jim seems to hit the nail on the head in that the carpet company should have risk assessments in place. Clearly the carpets are big and heavy, therefore they must have some form of manual handling assessment in place, likewise there is an obvious risk that when stored vertically without any form of restraint that there is a reasonable and real possibility of them falling. Given the size and weight of the carpets, the possible consequences are serious in terms of injury -broken bones etc.. It is also reasonable to assume that in a retail environment that customers will want to get near to and touch the carpets, which depending on how well they are secured could result in them falling. Therefore has the carpet comapny done all that is reasonable? - I think not!! We are not talking about a high cost solution. Many carpet shops that I've been in have a type of racking system that separates adjacent rolls of carpet - these usually seem to employ metal 'C' shaped brackets afixed to the wall, through which it would be very easy to run restraining ropes at various heights to prevent a roll of carpet falling forward onto someone. So in short, ask for their risk assessments - one covering this risk should be available - if not then the assessment is clearly deficient - if one exists has it adequately covered this issue and were the controls in place?

Posted By Karen Todd Tina, Fats, We have a saying that we use: "How would you stop a determined idiot?". This helps us to think outside the box, to stop people from thinking that someone would never do such a thing, therefore nothing needs to be done to reduce the risk from a hazard any further. It's not a saying I like using, but it does work. We've had electricians think like this when looking at new work equipment, discover ways to defeat it, then they've reprogrammed the equipment to eliminate these means of defeat. So, if someone indeed was really determined to do themselves harm, how would you stop them? Securing the carpets sounds reasonable to me, especially when you consider that this is what is done in other stores, i.e. is a fairly common practice. Regards, Karen

Posted By Laurie In a phrase, you cannot legislate against idiocy, therefore you must guard against it! Laurie

Posted By John C Having on accident in 20 years, does not mean there won't be one. If fact, there has been one...!! Reason: Because of poor controls? John

Posted By Gordon Thelwell Hi, Perhaps this would prove useful for you: http://www.therackgroup....ction=posts&fid=3&tid=56

Posted By Keith32 I agree with the general level of agreement in this thread - the shop appear to be at fault. The risk assessment should have identified reasonably foreseeable risks, which I think the case here - of course a customer would want to touch/assess the quality of the carpet. Leaving carpets rolls on end is asking for an accident- its just taken 20yrs to happen. As others have stated some form of roll racking is fairly normal in a carpet shop or samples/off cuts displayed with the rolls kept in the warehouse etc. As regards specific legislation - what about the Health, Safety and Welfare Regs, specifically Reg 13. 'SFARP suitable and effective measures shall be taken to prevent.... 3(b) any person being struck by a falling object likely to cause personal injury. What I find most interesting, and no offence meant, if the lady who posted this thread is an EHO, how come she didn't know what legislation covered such issues.