HHSRS VERSION 2

SEPTEMBER 2004

COLD

Persons aged 60 years or over

Damp and Mould Growth

EXCESS

Vulnerable group

Related hazards

HHSRS VERSION 2

Multiple locations

Yes

No

Secondary hazards

Yes

No

East facing elevation of block

DESCRIPTION OF HAZARDS

Elevation of maisonette

Dwelling:

End maisonette, on 5th and

6th floors of 1960s nine

storey slab block of 32

maisonettes, built of non-

traditional concrete

construction; orientation

East/West.

A)

B)

Background: The dwelling consists of a living room, kitchen and store on the lower floor and two

bedrooms and combined bathroom on the upper floor.

Heating: Heating is by electric elements set in the floor slab of the lower floor, with a thermostat

control in the living room. The occupier supplements this with portable electric heaters.

Windows and walls: The windows are single glazed and metal framed. All the windows are centre

pivot opening lights, except the bathroom which is a top hung opening light. There is damp and

mould growth to the external walls to the upper floor rooms.

LIST OF RELEVANT MATTERS

LIKELIHOOD & OUTCOMES

A

B

# Secondary hazards

A

B

a)

Thermal insulation

-

2

-

None

-

-

b)

Dampness

-

2

c)

Settling of insulation

-

-

d)

Type of heating provision

3

-

e)

Size of heating system

3

-

f)

Installation & maintenance

3

-

g)

Controls to heating system

3

-

h)

Amount of ventilation

-

3

Key

3

Seriously defective

I)

Ventilation controls

-

3

2

Defective

j)

Disrepair to ventilation

-

-

1

Not satisfactory

k)

Draughts/excess ventilation

-

3

-

Satisfactory/NA

A B C D E F G H

I

J

Average likelihood, outcomes and HHSRS score for excessive cold for persons aged 60

years or more in 1964-1979 non-HMOs and all dwellings, 1997-99.

HHSRS VERSION 2

SEPTEMBER 2004

HEALTH AND SAFETY RATING SYSTEM SCORES

1946-79 self contained Flat

LIKELIHOOD

Low

High

1 in

32

Example

32

42

24

13

7.5

4

2.5

1.5 >

Average: 400

< 4200 2400 1300 750 420 240 130

75

Justification

OUTCOMES

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Justification

RATING

The underfloor heating to the lower floor is inefficient and very expensive to run. Even if

run without regard to the cost, it is of an inappropriate type for the type of construction

and not capable of heating the whole of the dwelling. The exposed position and the

large glazed window areas and type of opening lights also mean that there is

considerable heat loss. The result is that the likelihood of the dwelling being unhealthily

cold is increased substantially.

%

Average: 34.0

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

Av: 6.0

4.6

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

31.6

7

15

26

7

15

26

Av: 18.0

21.5

7

15

26

31.6

38 >

4.6

38 >

21.5

Score

327

38 >

Av: 42.0

42.3

42.3

7

15

26

38 >

Although the likelihood of a harmful occurrence is higher than average, there is nothing

to indicate that spread of harms will vary significantly from the average.

Example

A B

Average: 880

C D E F G H

I

J

Score 10233

RATING SCORES AFTER IMPROVEMENT

IMPROVE

Justification

NEW RATING

Av: Nos

Improved

Likelihood to

1 in 1,000

Outcomes to

31.6 4.6 21.5 42.3 %

Installing an efficient central heating system capable of heating the whole of the

dwelling at reasonable cost and fitting double glazing would reduce the likelihood to

around the average for dwellings of this age group, (Band E). However, for further

improvements in the rating, major insulation measures to the concrete stucture would

be required.

Av: 880