Posted By Max Bancroft
Has anybody any experience/knowledge of an evacuation chair/device called LifeSlider - seems to be US design and shows a bit of radical thinking in it's approach - see
http://www.lifeslider.com/WhatIsLifeSlider.html .

I would like to know particularly how to get someone in a wheel chair into it given the difference in levels - the LifeSlider seems to sit at floor level. Thanks
Max Bancroft

Posted By Max Bancroft
Frank - I have emailed a picture to you (and can email to anybody else who is interested). The issues you mention certainly need to be kept in mind. In this case, the LifeSlider is a bit like a plastic tobaggon with an upright of similar shape which the assistant holds on to. So there is a reasonable distance to lower somebody from a wheelchair down.

I haven't had this happen to me yet but what do we do if, in the process of preparing a Personal Emergency Evacuation Plan, the mobility impaired person says: "No thanks - I don't want to transfer to an evacuation chair or similar - I'll head for a safe haven and wait for the Fire & Rescue Service (as they are now known in Scotland) to get me out"

Posted By Max Bancroft
You are correct - there is no derogation from the DDA in Scotland - and employers here as as responsible in law for evacuating everyone out of their building. However, what happens if the employer provides the chair, the trained assistant and the mobility impaired person decides she doesn't want to trust herself to them? We can't force her into the chair! I suppose I'll have to use my powers of persuasionas I do with all other H&S issues where people are unwilling to do what they should.

Posted By Max Bancroft
Just to be clear, the reason I asked the question in the first place was following discussions with a mobility impaired person who wasn't too happy with the current evacuation chair so I am looking at alternative designs. Relocation to a lower floor isn't possible and she is the only one who uses a wheel chair so at the moment a fire proof lift isn't justifiable.

Perhaps I'm getting ahead of myself in asking the question what if the impaired person decides none of the proposed methods of evacuation are suitabele and says she'll wait for the Fire and Rescue Service - can we allow her to make the choice? The reality might be that in a real fire she would allow herself to be evacuated using the least unacceptable chair.

As you say it will eventually be decided in a tribunal either under DDA or Fire Safety - but I'd rather not be the case that sets case law!

Posted By Ken Taylor
I'd be interested in hearing the view of the Disability Rights Commission on this one.

Is the person entirely non-ambulant? A number are are said to prefer to lower themselves down a stair at a time rather than trust the evacuation chair method.

Have you obtained a quote for converting your lift to an evacuation lift?

Posted By Frank Hallett
Hi Max and others on this thread. Please find appended extracts from the RRFSO; these may help to concentrate attention.

There is no specific, explicit requirement, exemption or derogation regarding less able or ambulant persons and therefore they must be considered as being subject to the general requirements for safety. For brevity, I have only included a couple of definitions and Articles 15 & 34.

It gets murkier every time I re-read this document.

Frank Hallett

“place of safety” in relation to premises, means a safe area beyond the premises.

“safety” means the safety of persons in respect of harm caused by fire; and “safe” shall be interpreted accordingly;

Procedures for serious and imminent danger and for danger areas
15.—(1) The responsible person must—
(a) establish and, where necessary, give effect to appropriate procedures, including safety drills, to be followed in the event of serious and imminent danger to relevant persons;
(b) nominate a sufficient number of competent persons to implement those procedures in so far as they relate to the evacuation of relevant persons from the premises; and
(c) ensure that no relevant person has access to any area to which it is necessary to restrict access on grounds of safety, unless the person concerned has received adequate safety instruction.
(2) Without prejudice to the generality of paragraph (1)(a), the procedures referred to in that sub-paragraph must—
(a) so far as is practicable, require any relevant persons who are exposed to serious and imminent danger to be informed of the nature of the hazard and of the steps taken or to be taken to protect them from it;
(b) enable the persons concerned (if necessary by taking appropriate steps in the absence of guidance or instruction and in the light of their knowledge and the technical means at their disposal) to stop work and immediately proceed to a place of safety in the event of
their being exposed to serious, imminent and unavoidable danger; and
(c) save in exceptional cases for reasons duly substantiated (which cases and reasons must be specified in those procedures), require the persons concerned to be prevented from resuming work in any situation where there is still a serious and imminent danger.
(3) A person is to be regarded as competent for the purposes of paragraph (1) where he has sufficient training and experience or knowledge and other qualities to enable him properly to
implement the evacuation procedures referred to in that paragraph.


Onus of proving limits of what is practicable or reasonably practicable
34. In any proceedings for an offence under this Order consisting of a failure to comply with a duty or requirement so far as is practicable or so far as is reasonably practicable, it is for the
accused to prove that it was not practicable or reasonably practicable to do more than was in fact done to satisfy the duty or requirement.

Posted By Ken Taylor
Except that you must not have a plan that involves leaving someone in a burning building and must have a plan for assisting those to escape that require such assistance - hence my interest in suggesting an evacuation lift that the wheelchair user, etc can use.

Posted By Ken Taylor
It depends upon the existing lift, Simone. A modern lift in a fairly recent building may need little more that some work on the electrics, the lift controls and a simple communication system - not much more than a few evacuation chairs. It's worth looking at BS5588-8:1999 and getting some quotes for the work. Don't let them quote for a full fire-fighting lift. It's surprising how many 'lift people' that arrive don't seem to know the difference.

Posted By Frank Hallett
I suspect that Max has moved on from this thread now, but it is apparent that there are many premises controllers out there with substantial problems re the "disabled" person and emergency evacuation.

The DDA isn't just about routine access, even though most who attempt to comply still artificially restrict their efforts to this area of access; the "disabled" access & egress must also include the emergency evacuation processes as well.

I believe that the unfulfilled need for a major "step-change" in understanding of the issue when considerd in terms of emrgency evacuation is the greatest problem - mostly in those who control the actual funds rather than the resource itself.

Simone and Martin Harney are correct that it appears to be a can of worms; but only because that step-change hasn't yet ben realised and we're still [as a society] trying to bodge, fudge and apply minima rather than maxima when considering this.

incidentally, I find the general perception of "disabled" is still only a small proportion of the actual remit of the term. And NO, I'm not disabled within the meaning of the DDA - yet.

For Martin and others with local authority controlled public access buildings; you have my considerable sympathy as you cannot get it right withoput adequate funds - there really is no other answer.

Frank Hallett