LIKELIHOOD

A

1

Type of opening light

1

a

Ease of window operation

-

b

Safety catches

3

c

Opening limiters

-

d

Sill heights

-

e

Disrepair of window

2

f

Ease of cleaning

-

g

Height of guarding

-

h

Easily climbed guarding etc

2

i

Openings in guarding

-

Key

j

Constn./ repair of guarding

-

HHSRS VERSION 2

HHSRS VERSION 2

SEPTEMBER 2004

FALLS BETWEEN LEVELS

Vulnerable group:

Persons aged under 5 years

Related hazards:

Entrapment & collision

Multiple locations

Yes

Secondary hazards

Yes

No

No

A)

First floor front bedroom window

A)

External view

A)

Full opening

iii

A)

Plan

main bedroom

b

m

f

path

i

h below

ii

grass

post & paling fence

DESCRIPTION OF HAZARD/S

Dwelling:

1930s, Semi detached house, on sloping site

A)

First floor front bedroom window:

The house has uPVC double glazed casement windows, which were

installed about 5 years ago. The window to the first floor front bedroom comprises a main fixed light below a

narrow top hung opening and a side hung opening light. This is fitted with a safety catch, which limits the opening

to less than 100 mm. However, the faulty safety catch is easily disengaged allowing the window to be opened to a

full 90 degrees. All other windows appear satisfactory.

The sill height is some 900 mm above the bedroom floor, but there is a radiator between. Externally, it is 4.2

metres above a 1 metre wide concrete path. There is a kerb and grassed area in front of this. Below, about one

metre to the side of the window, is a sagging wooden post and paling fence.

LIST OF RELEVANT MATTERS

A

2

2

-

A

2

OUTCOMES

a

Height above window/ level

b

Nature of ground/ surface #

c

Non-safety glass

# Secondary hazards

i

Concrete kerb

3 Seriously defective

2 Defective

1

Not satisfactory

-

Satisfactory/NA

Likelihood to

1 in

3,200

Outcomes to

0.5

4.6 21.5 73.4 %

As the first floor front bedroom window is the only faulty window in the dwelling,

fitting a more secure safety catch would reduce the likelihood of a fall to better

that average. Given the very small likelihood, removing the concrete path and

kerb is not really warranted, so the outcomes remain the same.

Improved

IMPROVE

Justification

NEW RATING

Av: Nos

A B C D E F G H

I

J

Average likelihood, outcomes and HHSRS score for falls between levels by persons aged

under 5 years in and around 1920-45 houses, 1997-99.

Score

5

HHSRS VERSION 2

SEPTEMBER 2004

HEALTH AND SAFETY RATING SYSTEM SCORES

1920-45 House

1 in

1800

LIKELIHOOD

Low

High

Example Average: 1564

1800

< 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

Although the sill is at a normal height, it would be possible for a child to use the radiator

to climb onto the sill and disengage the safety catch, if the window was left ajar, or for an

adult to fall while using the fully open side window to clean the fixed pane. However, with

only one such window in the house and this being in the main bedroom, the likelihood of

a fall would be no more than average for the stock - that is around 1 in 1,800

%

Average: 0.2

0.5

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

7

15

26

38 >

Av: 1.6

4.6

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

7

15

26

38 >

Av: 7.9

21.5

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

7

15

26

38 >

Av: 90.3

73.4

0.5

4.6

21.5

73.4

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

7

15

26

38 >

Depending on how the person falls, he or she will land wholly on the concrete path or

kerb, partly on the path or kerb, wholly on the grass, or on the wooden fence. The latter

is unlikely given the way the window opens. The first two possibilities appear the most

likely and, with the added height due to the sloping site, the chance of a fatal, severe or

serious fall is increased to figures above those for the average spread of harms.

Average: 4

J

A B C D E F G H

I

9

Score

RATING SCORES AFTER IMPROVEMENT