HHSRS 06/06

29 (IDeA - 01)

June 2006

Structural collapse and falling elements

Yes

Yes

No

No

Vulnerable age

Related hazards

All Ages

None

Multiple locations

Secondary hazards

DESCRIPTION OF HAZARDS

DWELLING:

1978, semi detached house

Background: The property is a 1978 semi detached house of traditional brick and tile construction

with architectural tile hanging to the front and rear walls from the eaves down to a line at the front

entrance canopy level to the front elevation and above the head of the ground floor windows to the rear

of the house. There is a front paved path leading to the entrance into the house and a paved path to

the rear door. Some of the wall tiles to both front and rear of the house have begun to slip and fall from

various heights, including near the eaves, and tile debris can be found on top of the canopy at the front

and also on the paved path at the rear of the house.

LIST OF RELEVANT MATTERS

LIKELIHOOD & OUTCOMES

a

Structural movement

-

b

Structural cracks

-

c

Open joints to bricks

-

d

Cladding defects

3

e

Loose copings

-

f

Loose guarding

-

g

Structural damage

3

h

Disrepair to lintels/sills

-

i

Insecure frames or hinges

-

j

Roof movement

-

k

Loose roof covering

-

l

Loose pots to chimneys

-

m

Insecure rain water goods

-

n

Staircase failure

-

o

Defective ceilings

p

Defective floors

q

Defective internal walls

r

Insecure internal frames

s

Loose fittings and fixtures

Outcomes

a

Height of falling objects

b

Size and weight of element

# Compounding matters

A

-

-

-

-

-

3

3

B

-

-

None

Key

3

2

1

-

-

Seriously defective

Defective

Not satisfactory

Satisfactory/NA

29 (IDeA - 01)

June 2006

HEALTH AND SAFETY RATING SYSTEM SCORES

LIKELIHOOD

Low

High

1 in

320

Av 1946-79 Houses: 10,440

320

< 4200 2400 1300 750 420 240 130

75

42

24

13

7.5

4

2.5

1.5 >

Justification

There is an increased likelihood of an occurrence of tiles falling at or near both the front

and rear entrance doors as the result of the continuing failure of the fixings. Whilst there is

some protection afforded by the canopy to the front there is no protection to the rear

However, the tiles are likely to fall straight down, but will still pose a threat of injury to

occupants and visitors.

OUTCOMES

%

Av 1946-79: 0.3

Class I

0.2

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

7

15

26

38 >

Av: 0.0

Class II

0.0

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

7

15

26

38 >

Av: 7.5

Class III

10

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

7

15

26

38 >

Av: 92.2

Class IV

89.8

< 0.05 0.15 0.3

0.7

1.5

3

7

15

26

38 >

Justification

Although the nature of the falling objects, i.e sharp tile edges, could cause a severe harm

outcome if falling from the higher levels, this possibility is reflected in the national

averages.

Av. 1946-79 Houses: 1

RATING

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

Score:

18

RATING SCORES AFTER IMPROVEMENT

IMPROVE

Likelihood to

1 in 5600

Outcomes to

0.2

0.0 10.0 89.8

%

Justification

Securely rehanging the wall hung slates or replacing them with an alternative protective

decorative finish would bring the likelihood back to the national average.

Av: 1

NEW RATING

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

Score:

1

Av: Nos

Average likelihood and health outcomes for persons of all ages, 1997-99.