A) Front bedroom window
A) Plan
basement area
roof of bay
DESCRIPTION OF HAZARD/S
LIST OF RELEVANT MATTERS
LIKELIHOOD
A
1
Type of opening light
3
a
Ease of window operation
2
b
Safety catches
2
c
Opening limiters
3
d
Sill heights
1
e
Disrepair of window
-
f
Ease of cleaning
2
g
Height of guarding
-
h
Easily climbed guarding etc
2
i
Openings in guarding
-
Key
j
Constn./repair of guarding
-
OUTCOMES
a
Height above ground/ level #
b
Nature of ground/ surface #
c
Non-safety glass
# Secondary hazards
I
Stone front door steps
3 Seriously defective
2 Defective
1
Not satisfactory
-
Satisfactory/NA
No
No
Multiple locations
Yes
Secondary hazards
Yes
Vulnerable group:
Persons aged under 5 years
Related hazards:
Entrapment & collision
HHSRS VERSION 2
SEPTEMBER 2004
FALLS BETWEEN LEVELS
HHSRS VERSION 2
A) First floor front windows - The window in the smaller front bedroom of the first floor flat comprises
a double hung sash. The internal sill is approximately 840 mm above floor level but a wide double
radiator runs the full width of the window below the sill. Externally, there is a basement area some
6.4 metres directly below half of the window. About 4.2 metres below the other half of the window
are stone entrance steps. Iron railings run either side of these steps and also separate the pavement
from the basement area. Other windows in the flat are similar but have fewer secondary hazards.
A) Vertical section
d
a
g
b/c
f
840 mm
u
6.4 m
porch
i
up v
i
basement
area
f
bedroom
Dwelling:
First floor flat in c.1890 converted house
A
2
3
2
A
2
Average likelihood, outcomes and HHSRS score for falls between levels by persons aged
under 5 years in and around pre-1920 flats, 1997-99.
Score
HHSRS VERSION 2
SEPTEMBER 2004
HEALTH AND SAFETY RATING SYSTEM SCORES
Pre 1920 converted s.c. Flat
1 in
560
LIKELIHOOD
Low
High
Average: 2742
Example
560
< 4200 2400 1300 750 420 240 130
75
42
24
13
7.5
4
2.5
1.5 >
Justification
OUTCOMES
Class I
Class II
Class III
Class IV
Justification
RATING
The other front window gives access to the unguarded flat roof of the bay. The
likelihood of a fall is increased significantly by the relatively low cills, the positioning of
the double radiators and the ease with which the lower sashes can be unlatched and
lifted.
%
Average: 0.4
4.6
< 0.05 0.15 0.3
0.7
1.5
3
7
15
26
38 >
Av: 3.2
21.5
< 0.05 0.15 0.3
0.7
1.5
3
7
15
26
38 >
Av: 5.9
31.6
< 0.05 0.15 0.3
0.7
1.5
3
7
15
26
38 >
Av: 90.5
42.3
13
4.6
21.5
31.6
42.3
< 0.05 0.15 0.3
0.7
1.5
3
7
15
26
38 >
A direct fall of over 6 metres is possible from this window and one rear window. The harm
outcomes from this particular window are likely to be substantially more severe than from
most first floor windows, due to the formidable secondary hazards. These are the
concreted basement well, the stone front door steps and, particularly, the iron railings to
the stairs and basement which are positioned directly below the centre of the window.
Example
Average: 4
J
A B C D E F G H
I
138
Score
RATING SCORES AFTER IMPROVEMENT
Likelihood to
1 in
5,600
Outcomes to
4.6 21.5 31.6 42.3 %
IMPROVE
Justification
NEW RATING
Av: Nos
There is little that can be done to improve the spread of harms, but providing safety bars
and limiters on the windows would substantially reduce the likelihood of a fall, and
thereby considerably improve the overall rating.
Improved Av: 3
A B C D E F G H
I
J