The evacuation of hotel guests

[John Webb]

Regarding wheelchair users there are also the problems that:
(a) If an EVAC is used, the evacuated person is left without means of getting around once outside the building.
(b) Many places now find staff unwilling to commit themselves to EVAC because of the perceived potential for damaging muscles etc. or being sued for dropping the disabled person.
(Conversation with fire officers for heritage buildings a couple of years ago.)

[Pip]

If I remember correctly, the B.S. advises that people in wheelchairs should generally be evacuated in them,and not to use an evac chair.the difficulty in having trained/fit staff to evacuate disabled is well debated.Evacuation lifts in most circumstances are inappropriate through excessive cost/not practical.There are arguments for and against using an ordinary lift in a fire situation.lets have a few  court cases to rule what is 'reasonable in the circumstances'.The occupier is caught between the DDA and FSO, and  current advice could leave them vunerable.

[wee brian]

Thats why its best to put them on the ground floor

[Pip]

Of course, but not always possible- if the 'service' is only on an upper floor (not talking about sleeping accommodation), and there is already a lift serving that floor................

[jokar]

Then the management have to provide reasonable access and an evacuation plan.  No reason to treat vunerable people differently, just consult them or their represenative groups and deal with the scenarios in a proper manner.

[inspectionofficer]

What you must consider is;Is it a foreseeable occurence?if so have you done everything reasonably practicable to evacuate?If not you are culpable and your assessment erroneous.Civil or enforcement action could follow.Other issues are manual handling,as I pointed out to a Residential Care Homeowner who has two staff(middle aged ladies)and elderly and infirm residents,some on medication...is she really being reasonable expecting the two night workers to physically remove non-ambulant drugged people into evacuation chairs and then evacuate them in a stressful situation,they may manage one or two before being exhausted or more likely under pressure have an accident by falling down the stairs(civil action...perhaps).The crux of the isssue is the contingency arrangements for evacuation have to be plausible under scrutiny(Barrister style).
As far as I am aware if you offer ground floor accomodation only on the grounds of safety you are within the DDA.Unless this has changed?

[Ken Taylor]

Ground Floor could be OK - provided that the discrimination is held to be 'reasonable'. A matter, I suppose, for (dare I say) man on the Clapham omnibus or the opinion of the Court on the day!

I would, however, seriously look into what other measures might be reasonable - including possible upgrading of the lift(s) to evacuation standard.

[kurnal]

I would, however, seriously look into what other measures might be reasonable - including possible upgrading of the lift(s) to evacuation standard.

Most unlikely to be reasonably practicable in an existing building. its like the old joke about asking directions of a passer by in Dublin "If I were you I wouldn't start from here".

Care homes are of course different to hotels and as inspection officer says the expectation of the two staff invariably on duty is just to close doors and move those at imminent risk to a place of relative safety. If we are saying two staff is not enough then some hard decisions have to be made.

Many care homes would simply not be viable if staffing levels were increased over and above those required by CSCI. Most of the residents are local authority funded and the social services really squeeze them tight (Any privately funded residents will be subsidising the publicly funded residents.)

To require more would simply put most out of business.

[jokar]

And that is where reasonable comes in.

[Ken Taylor]

Probably so, Kurnal. It's just worth seeking to ensure that you haven't missed something that could later be regarded as reasonable. The conversion might cost less than employing another member of staff.

[TallyHo]

I know of a 70 room hotel of 5 floors and basement where wheel chair users could find themselves occupying any room on any upper floor.  There are two staircases which are not adequately protected.  One of the staircases terminates on the first floor where the exit route then proceeds through a bedroom (which opens directly onto the staircase) onto a balcony then down a single external staircase.  There are no refuge points and there is only 1 porter on duty at night.

The owner wants to know what the problem is as the local FRS have visited the premises on numerous occasions and haven’t raised any issues with the set up.

[Martin Burford]

DavyH
your first port of call is to arrange a meeting with the FRS...and take with you any previous correspondence you may have from them.  Without seeing the premises I would be reluctant to comment further.
Conqueror

[jokar]

I would suspect that under DDA the Company may not be being reasonable by admitingly opening the Hotel to people who are vunerable but then not having a safe evacuation plan to assist them to get out in the event of an incident.  Again, whilst FPA had some successess the WFPL and now RR(FS)O makes RP look at their responsibilies in a different way and they have to justify their approach.  better in the cold light of day then in a Coroners court.