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
firesafety101  
#1 Posted : 16 July 2024 11:57:50(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

Hi, This has come from my post regarding speaking evidence in court but differs as it is focussed on the sleeping risk in halls of residence at university.

We are asked for written proof that our daughter will safely react to hearing the fire alarm while asleep in her bedroom, or would she panic and not react correctly.

This information has been required by the University H&S department.

On our side we have Me, Social Worker and her family who all know her very well.

If we cannot provide the proof they want they may not allow her to stay in the Halls of residence and would have to commute on a daily basis, (1 hour or more each way), the room they have pencilled in is right next to the main entrance and she has demonstrated she can exit from that room successfully.

One of her issues is High Anxiety and she is Selective Mute.

Thanks.

Roundtuit  
#2 Posted : 16 July 2024 13:06:59(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Why not suggest during the summer recess (no other students present) a trial sleep over at the halls?

This would be your daughter in the room and at some stage the university staff would trigger the alarm so that they can see her reaction. You will however have to accept that she would need to be on her own - no family or friends in attendance (or at the end of a phone/tablet/laptop providing prompts).

Satisfactory written proof of behaviour is going to be impossible to provide in an unbiased manner.

thanks 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
firesafety101 on 16/07/2024(UTC), firesafety101 on 16/07/2024(UTC)
Roundtuit  
#3 Posted : 16 July 2024 13:06:59(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Why not suggest during the summer recess (no other students present) a trial sleep over at the halls?

This would be your daughter in the room and at some stage the university staff would trigger the alarm so that they can see her reaction. You will however have to accept that she would need to be on her own - no family or friends in attendance (or at the end of a phone/tablet/laptop providing prompts).

Satisfactory written proof of behaviour is going to be impossible to provide in an unbiased manner.

thanks 2 users thanked Roundtuit for this useful post.
firesafety101 on 16/07/2024(UTC), firesafety101 on 16/07/2024(UTC)
peter gotch  
#4 Posted : 16 July 2024 13:46:44(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
peter gotch

Hi firesafety

This sounds like one of those scenarios where some Safety Bod (if it was actually them) trying to tick all the boxes.

"We are asked for written proof that our daughter will safely react to hearing the fire alarm while asleep in her bedroom, or would she panic and not react correctly."

Do they ask every other student taking up occupation of a hall of residence the same question?

As if they were to do this would every one of them be able to "prove" that when they have spent all evening in the Student Union, followed by a party, that they will "safety react to hearing the fire alarm while asleep"?

Answer - almost certainly that the Uni hasn't asked this question of MOST potential residents and that if they did, some of the said potential residents would have difficulty in confirming that they would be sufficiently compos mentis, to be alerted when fast asleep to the alarm going off, perhaps even inclusive of confirming that they don't sleep with their ear pods in and heavy metal as the lullaby.

Perhaps time to ask the Uni's equalities team to get involved.

Next stop after that the student's MP.

Overall, this appears to be one of those situations where someone doesn't realise (or refuses to accept) that there is no clear line between "safety" and "danger", but rather a range of levels of risk (aka lack of 100% safety) in which the risk should be managed appropriately, not to some putative ZERO.

If that doesn't suit the design of the Safety Bod's templated form, then time to bring the form into the 21st Century (though it should have been fixed in the LAST Century).

Edited by user 16 July 2024 13:47:21(UTC)  | Reason: Grammar

thanks 1 user thanked peter gotch for this useful post.
firesafety101 on 16/07/2024(UTC)
thunderchild  
#5 Posted : 16 July 2024 14:08:09(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
thunderchild

What ^^he said^^

I hate to say it but this looks like the educational facility throwing another excuse your way. Sorry to put it that way but its how it seems.

Yes, defo get the MP and the papers involved!

Messey  
#6 Posted : 16 July 2024 18:32:47(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Messey

FS 101 - I note that you say “If we cannot provide the proof they want they may not allow her to stay in the Halls of residence”.

Have they said this or do you have this in writing? 

Also, would they be satisfied if the written ‘proof’ was from yourself or your daughter, or do they want a health professional to compile it? If they are happy for it to come from yourself or your daughter, just do it!! 

IMHO, its a pretty confrontational attitude to take. As the Responsible Person, of course its their responsibility to make this happen and not issue threats and ultimatums - especially where the vulnerability includes anxiety for goodness sake. 

In all my years in fire safety, I have never had to ‘ban’ anyone from any building due to their disability and I have worked in some challenging environments including in the forensic mental health setting.
I have had to make difficult decisions such as not allowing lone working at weekends for a disabled person in a wheelchair as her buddy system wouldnt work out of hours. But she was not banned, as instead her dept made sure she could use a ground floor office near the security office at weekends and that she booked in and out. Banning was never an option

It is reasonable - in fact essential - that the Uni should ask what might be pretty personal questions as part of a PEEP process. They might want to take advice from their Health Advisors or other third parties, but the attitude MUST be ‘How can we accommodate this student and not ‘Can we accommodate this student’?’ - that is outrageous!

Where are you in the PEEP process?

 I always ask the person who requires assistance what they need to help get them to a place of safety. They know their condition best and they will be motivated to get it right as its their backside that will be burnt if we get it wrong. Then once I know if that assistance (if any) can be accommodated, I would put it in place.
So does she (and you) think she may need assistance in waking up and evacuating due to her disability? 

If so, what would you need to make it happen? Vibrating pillow pad? A pager? A ground floor room? A system where security staff will focus on checking she is evacuating during an emergency?
If you suggest a reasonable adjustment, then they have to do it. By a reasonable adjustment, defining that term that will be very subjective as the parent, but objectively we are talking costs here - so offering to cover or contribute some of them (if necessary) might help

Its not your role to do the PEEP for them, but it seems they are struggling a bit. If they have ‘threatened’ not to accommodate her in the Halls, get it in writing ASAP mate along with the reasons they are unable to accommodate her, as that may give you some leverage moving forward.

Good luck as I am aware that the clock is ticking here 

thanks 2 users thanked Messey for this useful post.
peter gotch on 17/07/2024(UTC), A Kurdziel on 17/07/2024(UTC)
firesafety101  
#7 Posted : 17 July 2024 10:21:19(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

Hi Messey, thanks.  Their issue comes from the Anxiety (a phobia of communicating) which we continually tell them is about communicating with strangers.  Not that she 'falls apart' when something needs to be done right away.  She fully understands why evacuation is important having me as her dad and practice at some hotels we have stayed in, fire alarm operating during the night.

Some good news, The Cheshire County FRS officer called me this morning and we had a very good chat.  He told me he had been into the Uni and done training with the staff about evacuation and that includes Porters and Security ensuring everyone is evacuating.  We had a Teams meeting yesterday with the college and I asked about does anyone do a Sweep and they told me they don't have the staff so Annie has to do it herself.

The fire officer will be visiting the Uni to inform the staff their responsibilities.  Hopefully that should bring an end to this issue.

Your comment about Reasonable Adjustments is interesting in the way you say if I come up with the reasonable adjustments they have to do them.  Where can I find that please Messey.

Part of the degree course is presentations to her class and then a Mock Court hearing where she will be questioned by Barristers (members of staff) and she will be expected to speak.  (The degree includes Forensic Sciences). They say that has to be done otherwise she will fail her degree.

The Uni apparently are their own exam moderators but say they cannot change this.  I have searched everywhere  to find a reasonable adjustment which she can use instead of talking.  Annie has told us it is her mission to speak during the course because she does not want to fail the course.  I am aware a Judge can allow adjustments in Court but unable to speak to anyone about this.  

The largest minefield I have come across up to now.

Thanks everyone.

Messey  
#8 Posted : 17 July 2024 22:50:11(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Messey

Originally Posted by: firesafety101 Go to Quoted Post

Your comment about Reasonable Adjustments is interesting in the way you say if I come up with the reasonable adjustments they have to do them.  Where can I find that please Messey.

Its all part of the Equality Act which states:

it is unlawful to discriminate in access to goods, facilities, services, and managing property. Businesses are also required to make ‘reasonable adjustments’ to their policies and/or physical aspects of their premises, to avoid discrimination.

The Responsible Person has to make provision to ensure that:

it must be possible for persons to evacuate the premises as quickly as and safely as possible’ and ‘establish and, where necessary, give effect to appropriate procedures

I have DMed you with further details and how musch the Uni may have to pay under discrimination compensation payments if they fail to act correctly  

The info supplied isnt full legal advice, but is aimed at letting the Uni and their representitives know that you are aware of your rights and that in many cases, applying reasonable adjustments is cheaper than paying out compensation 

I note that the Uni dont operate a sweep. Did they say how they account for tenants in the Halls? I doubt a booking in/out system would be effective. 

It seems reasonable to me that an adjustment is that your daughter is provided with a ground floor room near an entrance

She informs the Uni (say security as they are likely to be on duty 24/7) every time when she goes out and when she is back home. Security make a note or use a tally to record ROOM 123 IS OCCUPIED and ROOM 123 ISNT OCCUPIED (on the reverse)

Where an evacuation is required and she is in occupying her room, security check she is out when they attend. They may need a key. 
To say they havent enough staff is not acceptable ....... just a few ideas

thanks 1 user thanked Messey for this useful post.
firesafety101 on 20/07/2024(UTC)
HSSnail  
#9 Posted : 18 July 2024 07:18:37(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
HSSnail

Originally Posted by: firesafety101 Go to Quoted Post

The Uni apparently are their own exam moderators but say they cannot change this.  I have searched everywhere  to find a reasonable adjustment which she can use instead of talking.  Annie has told us it is her mission to speak during the course because she does not want to fail the course.  I am aware a Judge can allow adjustments in Court but unable to speak to anyone about this.  

The largest minefield I have come across up to now.

Thanks everyone.

Having a none visible disability myself, a son with similar issues, and now a wheal chair bound father i feel your pain. Not sure if it would be allowed in court, but i was watching a programme on Rob Burrows (RIP) and it got me thinking. Is there some computer software out there that would change typed text into voice? Not sure if acceptable in court but wort a try.


chris42  
#10 Posted : 18 July 2024 13:42:02(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chris42

Originally Posted by: firesafety101 Go to Quoted Post

Part of the degree course is presentations to her class and then a Mock Court hearing where she will be questioned by Barristers (members of staff) and she will be expected to speak.  (The degree includes Forensic Sciences). They say that has to be done otherwise she will fail her degree.

The Uni apparently are their own exam moderators but say they cannot change this.  I have searched everywhere  to find a reasonable adjustment which she can use instead of talking.  Annie has told us it is her mission to speak during the course because she does not want to fail the course.  I am aware a Judge can allow adjustments in Court but unable to speak to anyone about this.  

The largest minefield I have come across up to now.

Thanks everyone.


Courts must deal with people who have this condition and have a way of dealing with it. If there was a murder and the only witness was someone with this condition, they would have to find a way for them to provide their statement and to be cross examined on it.

I may have this wrong, but wouldn’t your daughter be considered an expert witness and so provide all the information they need to give beforehand. Surely the defendant’s legal representative could ask all their questions in writing if necessary, beforehand based on the evidence provided, and a response also made in writing. This could all just be read out in court for the judge and jury etc, by anyone.

Roundtuit  
#11 Posted : 18 July 2024 15:25:54(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Originally Posted by: chris42 Go to Quoted Post
Surely the defendant’s legal representative could ask all their questions in writing if necessary, beforehand based on the evidence provided, and a response also made in writing. This could all just be read out in court for the judge and jury etc, by anyone.

What about questions that may arise from trial testimony delivered by others, post evidential disclosure?

The greatest challenge with the written word is having it deliver the intended message to all recipients where the mere activity of reading can significantly alter the message - the tone, tempo, intuation of the speaker altering what we hear or more correctly perceive we hear.

It is common on these forums with short form writing people take offence, read the post other than written, get the wrong message due to acronyms and jargon or head of at a tangent. How often do we have to seek clarification of the posed question or responses thereto?

The jury engage with the performance that is the trial - they dont currently sit reading reams of documents to form their decision instead being provided a trail of evidence by the barristers to support either the case for the prosecution or the case for the defence.

Roundtuit  
#12 Posted : 18 July 2024 15:25:54(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Originally Posted by: chris42 Go to Quoted Post
Surely the defendant’s legal representative could ask all their questions in writing if necessary, beforehand based on the evidence provided, and a response also made in writing. This could all just be read out in court for the judge and jury etc, by anyone.

What about questions that may arise from trial testimony delivered by others, post evidential disclosure?

The greatest challenge with the written word is having it deliver the intended message to all recipients where the mere activity of reading can significantly alter the message - the tone, tempo, intuation of the speaker altering what we hear or more correctly perceive we hear.

It is common on these forums with short form writing people take offence, read the post other than written, get the wrong message due to acronyms and jargon or head of at a tangent. How often do we have to seek clarification of the posed question or responses thereto?

The jury engage with the performance that is the trial - they dont currently sit reading reams of documents to form their decision instead being provided a trail of evidence by the barristers to support either the case for the prosecution or the case for the defence.

chris42  
#13 Posted : 19 July 2024 09:44:36(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chris42

Of course it is perhaps not an ideal situation, but as I say if they were a witness to a murder. Any further questions or clarification of what was previously presented, would require the expert witness to be recalled to the courtroom any way so again the questions could be put to them and answers written down and read out by another person.

The expert witness has no axe to grind one way or another and their testimony will be bland anyway, compared to that of the accused etc. I didn’t suggest everyone reads reems of paper, though I would expect the lawyers to do so beforehand to prepare. Everything could be read out.

It appears these people agree that this sort of thing can be done

https://www.communicourt.co.uk/news/understanding-selective-mutism-adapting-legal-proceedings/#:~:text=During%20conferences%2C%20a%20person%20with,verbally%20or%20in%20written%20form).

Normally where there is a will to make things work, there is a way.

I wish them the best.

Chris

thanks 2 users thanked chris42 for this useful post.
peter gotch on 19/07/2024(UTC), firesafety101 on 20/07/2024(UTC)
firesafety101  
#14 Posted : 20 July 2024 12:51:03(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

Chris42 many thanks for that info, I was already aware of what the courts can do but finding it difficult to find any examples of it actually being done for real.  I've contacted some courts and the Office of the Forensic Sciance Register without any success.  If anyone can point me in the right direction that would be very much appreciated.

Thanks.

Messey  
#15 Posted : 20 July 2024 19:11:31(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Messey

Further to my earlier post of 16/7 - This is a copy of a DM I sent to FS 101 at that time in relation to the legal side of PEEPs (in my own opinion). The advice in this reply should not be seen as full legal advice, but just a pointer to help FS101 to convince the Responsible Person they need to comply with the relevant legislation 

​​​​​​​-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since 2010 when the DDA was replaced by the Equality Act, the EA has stated that it is unlawful to discriminate in access to goods, facilities, services, and managing property. Businesses are also required to make ‘reasonable adjustments’ to their policies and/or physical aspects of their premises, to avoid discrimination.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is advising disabled residents in general needs accommodation [NOTE 1 below] that the failure to provide auxiliary aids may be seen by a judge as breaching the service provision aspects of Part 4 of the Equality Act 2010. 

The 2024 Vento scale [NOTE 2 below] for compensation in such cases for the higher band is between £35,200 to £58,700 for the most severe instances.where the discrimination is continued and causes stress. 

Implementing a PEEP and providing a suitable system to help the person requiring assistance will, in many cases, be more cost-effective than paying compensation claims.

The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (Fire Safety Order) reached the statue books in 2006. The legal requirements of the Fire Safety Order applies equally to disabled and non-disabled people and includes general needs accommodation. However, means of escape for disabled people is rarely implemented or enforced in general needs accommodation.

The Fire Safety Order is criminal law, with a personal responsibility for compliance on the defined ‘Responsible Person’ within an organisation. 

Articles 14 and 15 state that there is a legal duty to [ensure that]:

‘in the event of danger, it must be possible for persons to evacuate the premises as quickly as and safely as possible’ and ‘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’ and ‘nominate a sufficient number of competent persons to implement those procedures in so far as to the evacuation of relevant persons from the premises.’

The government’s guidance on means for escape for disabled people backs up the legal position by stating in section 1.1 (legal overview) that:

‘Under current fire safety legislation, it is the responsibility of the person(s) having responsibility for the building to provide a fire safety risk assessment that includes an emergency evacuation plan for all people likely to be in the premises, including disabled people, and how that plan will be implemented. Such an evacuation plan should not rely upon the intervention of the Fire and Rescue Service to make it work.’

There is no legal requirement under the Fire Safety Order for assistance to be provided by an employee, just that the person must be competent and trained. It is, therefore, perfectly acceptable to include family, friends, and neighbours in a PEEP.

If employees are involved in an evacuation, employers must take care that they are not putting the employee in increased danger, as this will breach the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999.

EXPLANATORY NOTES: 

NOTE 1 General needs tenants are those who are non-vulnerable and able to live independently without any special housing or support requirements.

NOTE 2 Vento bands are legal guidelines used to calculate compensation for emotional distress and psychiatric injuries in employment-related cases, such as discrimination and whistleblowing. These bands provide a structured framework for determining the amount of compensation based on the severity of the case.

Sources;

FPA website article dated March 2022 ‘BUILDING EVACUATION STRATEGIES FOR DISABLED PEOPLE’

Article on Davison Morris website dated April 2024 ‘Increase in Vento Bands 2024’

thanks 1 user thanked Messey for this useful post.
peter gotch on 21/07/2024(UTC)
Users browsing this topic
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.