BCC 20-03

April 2008

Falling on Stairs etc

Vulnerable age

Persons aged 60 years or over

Related hazards

Falling on level surfaces

HHSRS Operating

Guidance: February 2006

Multiple locations

Yes

No

Secondary hazards

Yes

No

DESCRIPTION OF HAZARDS

Raised inspection chamber in lawn to rear

garden (above and left)

Slope of rear garden shown top left and

left

Dwelling: Two storey house, built 1987

Background: This is a mid-terraced, two storey house comprising a lounge and kitchen/diner at ground floor level

with two bedrooms and a bathroom/WC at first floor level. The front and rear external doors both have low level

thresholds and there are no other matters in relation to trips and slips in the house itself that are any different from that

expected in a house of this age in a typical condition. However, the rear garden which is laid mainly to lawn is steeply

sloped over the rear quarter of the overall garden depth, dropping some 920mm vertically over a horizontal distance of

around 1850mm. In addition, there is a raised inspection chamber cover in the flat section of lawn some 600mm beyond

the rear edge of the patio at the rear of the dwelling. This projects around 70mm above the ground level.

LIST OF RELEVANT MATTERS

LIKELIHOOD

OUTCOMES

a

Lack of floor surface

-

a

Hard surfaces

-

b

Excessive slope

2

b

Projections etc

-

c

Uneven surface

1

c

Nature of area

-

d

Trip steps/threshold

2

d

Thermal efficiency

-

e

Disrepair

-

f

Poor slip resistance

-

Key

3

Seriously defective

g

Inadequate drainage

-

2

Defective

h

Inadequate space

-

1

Not satisfactory

I

Poor lighting or glare

-

-

Satisfactory/NA

j

Thermal efficiency

-

RATING

Score: 217

H

I

J

RATING SCORES AFTER IMPROVEMENT

IMPROVE

Likelihood to

1 in 120

Outcomes to

1

4.6

21.5 72.9

%

Justification

Changes to the design of this garden are not warranted although the inspection chamber should be reduced in height to

remove the trip hazard at the top of the slope. Other changes would be difficult, e.g. fencing off would make

maintenance difficult and terracing it and adding steps handrails and guarding would be disproportionate to the hazard

reduction that would be achieved.

Av: 112

A

B

C

D

E

F

Average likelihood and health outcomes for persons aged 60 years or over, 1997-99.

NEW RATING

Av: Nos

Score: 120

H-

I

J

G

BCC 20-03

April 2008

HEALTH AND SAFETY RATING SYSTEM SCORES

Low

LIKELIHOOD

< 4200 2400

High

1 in

Av: Post 1979 House: 256

1300 750 420 240 130

75

42

24

13

7.5

4

2.5

G

Justification

Other than the slope to the rear garden, there are nothing to suggest that this house is significantly worse than average

in respect of Falling on stairs etc. However, this Hazard includes falling on ramps and slopes, and the slope is steep (in

the order of 1:2 or 22.5 degrees) with a change in level of more than 300mm. The use of this part of the garden by a

member of the vulnerable age group is more likely to result in a harmful fall, the steepness increasing the risk of a loss

of balance. The raised inspection chamber cover also increases the likelihood of a trip and fall down the slope.

OUTCOMES

%

Av: Post 1979 House: 1.4

15

26

Av: 6.3

15

26

15

26

1

38 >

4.6

38 >

Av: 25.3

21.5

38 >

Av: 67.0

72.9

38 >

Class I

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

7

Class II

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

7

Class III

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

7

Class IV

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

7

15

26

Justification

There is nothing to suggest that the spread of harms should be changed from the average, although the hazard is

external it is not an essential route that would be used at night so that an elderly person falling might remain

undiscovered. The surface on to which a person would fall is also somewhat forgiving

Av: Post 1979 House: 112

A

B

C

D E-

F

100

1.5 >