Opinion LETTERS email info@flat-living.co.uk tel 0845 257 6374 fax 0845 257 6319
Flat Living
If you have a question or would like to share with other readers your ideas or experiences of living in a leasehold block, we want to hear from you. Address your comments or queries to the Flat Living team at info@flat-living.co.uk
Lift advice needed
We are the managing agents for a block of flats in Ealing that has three lifts. It is a 1960s block. None of the lifts have an emergency telephone. Obviously all new lifts are required to have that but is it a legal requirement to install phones to these lifts? The lift company who maintain them are saying it should be done.
Will ticketing work?
Name and address withheld
Matt Lewis of ILS Lift Group replies “The short answer is no it isn’t a legal requirement but as with so many areas of legislation there is a grey area and it is not cut and dried when it comes to potential legal liability. All new lifts installed after 1997 are legally required to comply with the European Lift Directive including the provision of a lift communication system. As these lifts were originally installed in the 1960s they do not fall into this category. For existing lifts the European Standard EN81-80 was introduced in 2003 and covered a 74- point list of recommendations for making older lifts safer. This includes the provision of a lift communication system where reasonably practical (which in most cases it is). This is where it gets more complicated. EN81-80 is not itself a legal statute, only a recommended standard. However where the lift is installed in work premises it then comes under The Health and Safety at Work Act and a piece of legislation called LOLER (The Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations) comes into effect. However, with private residential premises the lift is not deemed to be work equipment and therefore does not fall under the HASAW or LOLER. If the leaseholders/ freeholders are collectively liable for the lift but agree not
32
CLAMPING BAN
I was interested to read Mr Dennis’s comments on the above subject (Flat Living, issue 12, Letters). While I am sympathetic to the problem of “rogue clampers” who have caused real problems in the past, I do not think sufficient attention has been given to areas which need strong parking controls on private property. I chair the board of a block near Lord’s Cricket Ground which is a short distance from Central London. We had employed a reputable company to ticket and/or clamp our forecourt parking area to to have a phone then this is theoretically ok. Nevertheless, there may remain a liability to members of the public (or contractors) who use the lift (unless perhaps a disclaimer is clearly posted). If for example someone was travelling in the lift and it broke down and they suffered a panic attack or maybe worse because they had no means of making an emergency call to the lift company or fire brigade, then theoretically they might sue the leaseholders/freeholders for failing to take adequate steps to protect them in that scenario. We do not know of a case where that has been put to the test but it is a possibility and public liability insurance may not cover it. It may not be sufficient defence to say that the lift user is expected to use their own mobile phone (as there may not be a signal) or the lift alarm button which may be
protect the residents from people who park there to watch a cricket match or go shopping in the West End. We are now using the same company to ticket only as required by law and we hope this will be sufficient to protect the situation. Only time will tell but we hope we don’t have to introduce other measures which will be both costly and disruptive. If we can add weight to the FPRA campaign we would also be happy to help.
inaudible to other occupants of the building.
Health and safety compliance
I am one of six Directors of a management company which is the freeholder of a large Victorian House converted in the 1980s into 10 flats. Although we have an external property management company, we would be grateful if you would clarify the legal requirements as regards current legislation for the following: n Asbestos survey (carried out in 2005) which confirmed the likelihood of asbestos being contained in roof tiles but no evidence in communal areas. We pay the managing agents an annual fee to monitor/ register. As there has been
Susan Kaye, Chair, Addison House Management Company Ltd, London
no change in the property from the original inspection do we need to carry out an annual survey? n Health and Safety Assessment (carried out in 2011) - as we do not employ anyone on site is it necessary for an annual inspection? The only works carried out are with appointed contractors sourced from the agents. n Fire Assessment (carried out in 2011) - although we have a smoke alarm system with notices in place in communal areas advising fire procedures, do we need an annual inspection? I would be grateful for your advice on the above. Name and address withheld
Kevin Boreham, head of health, safety and compliance at Mainstay Residential Ltd replies
These are simple questions but the answers are complex. First the bad news - your asbestos survey carried out in 2005 is possibly no longer suitable and sufficient. There have been a number of changes to the regulations and codes of practice since 2005 so it is probably a good idea to have a new survey completed. The good news is, should the survey identify only low risk Asbestos Containing Materials (ACMs) major works to the property are not required and as the ACM’s do not degrade, then annual surveys are not required. Regular reviews of the survey and monitoring of ACMs is still required; but these can be done by a non-specialist such as your managing agent. Health and safety risk assessments are done to safeguard the safety and wellbeing of those who visit the property (invited or not). If the last assessment identified no high risk concerns then a review can be done by a non-specialist with an eye for detail, who has knowledge of the property and management systems in place. The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 states that the fire risk assessment should be reviewed on a regular basis. However, who conducts these reviews and when is the subject of much discussion and differences of opinion among professionals. The timing of the review is not stated and depends on assessment but should be at least annually. With regards to who does this, personally I think a certain amount of pragmatism is required and is allowed under the legislation and associated guidance documents. Large complex premises with complicated life safety systems are best left to a well trained professional; in small simple premises where little changes, it is possible for the review to be done by a non-specialist. On a final note, whether doing it yourself or using a specialist, it is important that records are kept of any reviews, inspections and alterations. Issue 13, Winter
Flat Living
