Health and Safety. Bandied about far too freely?

[Segilla]

The Housing Assn I am under is far too dictatorial, working to a master and servant relationship, whereas they are our managers.

Yet another recent change, clearing all personal property from the common parts of the buildings has been backed up by 'a requirement of Health and Safety. In part, this is most unreasoanble.

I think that any such use of the words can only be justified following the compilation of a safety assessment.
Any comments please.

[karenmac60]

But it's their association and their rules - it's not a democracy. They make the rules and enforce them. They don't have to say pretty please. If you don't like it you are free to move out and they will have no problems filling your tenancy. It might not be pleasant, but that's the way it is.

[EDDIE51]

segilla, I think this is more a question of how such matters are handled by the staff . Unfortunately not all staff are as good as they could be. I agree that this could and should have been dealt with more amicably.

[bednobs]

also, you say the stuff is not junk, and it probably isn't, but what if someone decided that their kitchen was a bit small, so to make more room they'd put their fridge on the landing (just as out of the way as a bookcase) or some terrible art that you hated?

[FredPuli43]

Landlords can put amost almost condition they like in tenancy agreements and the schedule of rules annexed to those. The use of the fashionable phrase 'health and safety' is annoying, but such conditions as this have been put mechanically in agreements by landlords for many decades, long before the phrase was common . A condition that 'common parts' 'hallways' etc be kept clear at all times or that no tenant put anything there, is perfectly standard.

The reason for such a condition in agreements may be that the landlords want to minimize the risk of being sued under Occupier Liability laws. Somebody falling over a bookcase or other property left in the common parts could have a claim. The landlord's insurers wouldn't like that, any more than the landlord would. But usually the reason seems to be no more than keeping certain standards up in a block, and preventing any tenant from abusing the practice to the disadvantage of others, by forbidding it altogether.

[The-HouseHusband]

They are well within their rights and do not even need to mention health and safety, if they wish to place a rule in place that states that communal areas are to be free of any personal effects then so be it.

You only have the right to store items in your own rented area and not spaces that are open to everyone unless things were put in writing when you signed the tenancy agreement.

As mentioned by a few others fire regs often require that passage ways are kept free from obstruction for the safety of both residents and the emergency services.

[tenrec]

Perhaps they should be charging rent for the items left on the landing ...

[Segilla]

Just read my last post.

[Segilla]

OK Eddie 51. How about this. Their policy on stairlfts is still being worked out, they say. A stairlft is the biggest obstacle in the block - but as old people get infirm, they are essential

[bednobs]

so? whats that got to do with anything in your op?

[woofgang]

It's actually quite common and sensible practice to deal with the easier parts of a problem first. So you get sorted the personal possessions in public areas, then you look at things like stairlifts.

[woofgang]

If you are cross about the way this is being handled and no so much about the actual requirements then why not tell them that?

[EDDIE51]

I have worked in several homes for the elderly and know people who work in others. None of them have stair lifts, they have stairs and lifts but NOT stair lifts, as you say stair lifts are a major obstacle in the event of fire. I actually think stair lifts are banned by law in care homes .Like wise I have NEVER heard of a block of flats or an Hotel that has a stair lift even those that have a significant number of elderly residents /customers. I'm almost certain that only ordinary private houses can have stair lifts.

[friedgreentomato]

oo oo oo Eddie I worked in a private care home back in the early 90's that had a stair lift!!

As for the OP, sorry do not find the HA dictatorial, it sounds common sense to me - if you are unhappy go through the appeal system.

[EDDIE51]

Back in the early 90s yes ,many care homes had stair lifts,(cheaper than a proper lift) but not now, H&S is far more stringent.

[Segilla]

Woofgang. I need facts first before going for them. Many of the responses here have been based on wrong assumptions because clearly it was not possible to cite all circumstances, as all I wanted to know was as laid out in my query.
Nevertheless thanks for all contributions.

Fried green tomato. A neighbour went all the way up to appeal over a quote - £650 to remove a tree, grind out root and plant a new one. Or £300 to remove tree and grind root.
Therefore £350 to plant a tree in vacant spot. They would not budge that this was sheer nonsense. He was outmanoeuvred by the adjudicator who was supposed to be impartial losing on the technicality that there was no requirement to consult Residents about expenditure of <£1K.

The dossier they provided was an inch thick (no exaggeration) and the case must have cost a substantial sum to defend. A simple, 'We seem to have made a mistake' would have saved a lot of time and money, but they were not willing to lose face - over yet another series of mistakes.

[woofgang]

you have been given the facts. H and S law, while overarching (ie the landlord cannot do anything that would contravene it) is not needed to set or implement rules regarding tenancy. The words "health and safety" can be used without necessarily referring to law. There are usually very good reasons for the rules that landlords set...if you don't like the rules then,unless they contravene landlord/tenant law, which these don't seem to, then you have one recourse which would be to leave. As i have said it its the way that things are done that upsets you then address this, not what is done.

[Segilla]

Woofgang. I should have written, 'I *needed* the facts ... '.Therafter all falls into place.