Health and safety experts warn: don't clear icy pavements, you could get sued

Standard Toaster

Linky


Unbelievable. Compensation culture indeed.

Health and safety experts warn: don't clear icy pavements, you could get sued

Pavements are being left covered in ice because of “ludicrous” laws that put home owners and businesses at risk of being sued if they try to clear them.



Robert Mendick and Laura Donnelly
Published: 8:45PM GMT 09 Jan 2010

A council worker gritts the pavements in Hale, Manchester Photo: AFP / Getty Images


Heavy snow, low temperatures and a lack of gritting mean pavements throughout the country are too slippery to walk on safely. Hospitals have been struggling to cope with rising numbers of patients who have broken bones after falling on icy paths.
Yet the professional body that represents health and safety experts has issued a warning to businesses not to grit public paths – despite the fact that Britain is in the grip of its coldest winter for nearly half a century.

Related Articles

• Fresh snow warning as big freeze continues
• Snow pushes ambulance services close to breaking point
• Britain's biggest snowman
• Calls to cut school holidays to make up for snow days
• Britain's big freeze in pictures: Derwentwater in Lake District turns to ice
• Blizzard warning as ministers order grit cuts

Under current legislation, householders and companies open themselves up to legal action if they try to clear a public pavement outside their property. If they leave the path in a treacherous condition, they cannot be sued.
Councils, who have a responsibility for public highways, say they have no legal obligation to clear pavements.
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents expressed its disappointment that public safety was being neglected because of fears of possible litigation. A spokesman said: “This is not showing a particularly good attitude. It would be much safer for the public to clear paths, even if it’s not on their property.”
But the Institution of Occupational Safety and Health, the professional body representing 36,000 health and safety experts, gave warning that this could lead to legal action.
In guidance to its members, who advise businesses through*out the country, it said: “When clearing snow and ice, it is probably worth stopping at the boundaries of the property under your control.”
Clearing a public path “can lead to an action for damages against the company, e.g. if members of the public, assuming that the area is still clear of ice and thus safe to walk on, slip and injure themselves”.
Legal experts said home owners could fall victim to the same laws if they tried to clear an icy path but failed to do the job properly. John McQuater, president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers, admitted: “If you do nothing you cannot be liable. If you do something, you could be liable to a legal action.”
Ann Widdecombe, the former Tory minister and critic of Britain’s burgeoning “compensation culture”, said last night: “The idea you can be sued for being helpful is absolutely ludicrous.”
Clare Marx, past president of the British Orthopaedic Association and orthopaedic consultant at Ipswich Hospital, said: “If people want to clear pavements, they should just do it. I would have thought it’s a public service and it is a shame we have ended up with a culture where if someone slips, they want to sue someone. People need a bit of grit, in both senses.”
The association said its members expected to have treated tens of thousands of fractures by the time the conditions eventually improved.
The national shortage of gritting salt is likely to mean even fewer paths will be gritted by councils in the days to come. The Government is trying to import supplies from the United States and Europe but they are not expected to arrive for another fortnight.
Members of the public say they have been warned by councils about the legal risks of gritting. Michael Pepper, 68, asked Cambridge county council to deliver grit which he offered to spread but was told by officials he could be sued if he did so. The council later insisted Mr Pepper had been given the wrong guidance.
The Royal Caledonian Curling Club was also forced to bow to health and safety rules as it abandoned plans for a match on the Lake of Menteith, near Stirling. The club was unable to obtain insurance after safety fears were expressed by emergency services.
Forecasters are predicting that freezing conditions will continue until at least Wednesday. Kent police said last night that the military was on stand-by to help if the weather in the county worsened. Motorists were advised not to travel unless absolutely necessary.

SeaFields

Thats a British article. Is it the same case here I wonder?

seamus

SeaFields wrote: »

Thats a British article. Is it the same case here I wonder?

Yes, it's tort law.

term

Yes, it's tort law.

Is there a law they don't teach?

DOCARCH

Minister for the Environment confirmed yesterday on radio that nobody could be sued for clearing pavements.

lucernarian

DOCARCH wrote: »

Minister for the Environment confirmed yesterday on radio that nobody could be sued for clearing pavements.

I'd rather hear the minister for Justice saying it than Gormless. I wonder what makes him so sure...

greysides

DOCARCH wrote: »

Minister for the Environment confirmed yesterday on radio that nobody could be sued for clearing pavements.

I saw someone politican say something similar on TV yesterday but I wouldn't be taking his word for it. It sounded more like 'shouldn't ' than 'wouldn't'. It would have no legal standing.

Pangea

It was on tv last night that this is a myth and u are not liable for clearing your own path or neighbours.

zagmund

What a messed up world this is.

People are afraid of 'doing their bit' by clearing the path because they might get sued.

What about the risk of being sued for being a lazy, selfish, pile of slush (there's other word I could use) that *wouldn't* clear the path when someone falls on untreated snow or ice outside your house ?

I'd prefer to do my bit and try to make it better than sit inside looking out at the people falling on the pavement afraid to clear it off.

Will people be relying on "Ah sure, it's natural so it must be OK" line ?

z

cinnamon

I saw a lawyer on the news last night and he said that if you didn't clean off the ice properly so as to leave some ice, and therefore lull people into thinking the whole pavement (outside your house) is clear and then they fall.

Well it makes common sense that if you clean it properly, then nobody should fall and have cause to sue.

Apparently in Germany it is up to individual residents to clear the area outside their houses; which makes perfect sense. In Ireland we wait for the council to do everything for us. Why do we do things arseways in Ireland - next they'll be wiping our bums for us :rolleyes:

seamus

cinnamon wrote: »

I saw a lawyer on the news last night and he said that if you didn't clean off the ice properly so as to leave some ice, and therefore lull people into thinking the whole pavement (outside your house) is clear and then they fall.

Afaik, the actual legal theory is that if you clear the ice off the pavement, then you have de facto assumed responsibility for ensuring that piece of pavement is clear and failure to do so properly means that you are negligent in that responsibility.

Whereas if you don't do it in the first place, it's not your responsibility.

Standard Toaster

cinnamon wrote: »

Apparently in Germany it is up to individual residents to clear the area outside their houses; which makes perfect sense. In Ireland we wait for the council to do everything for us. Why do we do things arseways in Ireland - next they'll be wiping our bums for us :rolleyes:

This is true. My German uncle was done a few years back when a local went on their ear and sued.

DOCARCH

DOCARCH wrote: »

Minister for the Environment confirmed yesterday on radio that nobody could be sued for clearing pavements.

Him and the government say a lot of things :rolleyes:, I'd take what he said with a pinch of "road salt"

Seriously though, he's got no authority really to make such a statement, he's not the Minister for Justice.

cinnamon

seamus wrote: »

failure to do so properly means that you are negligent in that responsibility.

But I just said if you do it properly in the first place, then there shouldnt be a problem.

Ally Dick

The parasitical solicitors are even advertising their services on telly. It's become a litiguous world out there !

Danno

I see no problem with people sueing, I do however have a MAJOR problem with the Judges who award victory to them in this case.

gurramok

seamus wrote: »

Afaik, the actual legal theory is that if you clear the ice off the pavement, then you have de facto assumed responsibility for ensuring that piece of pavement is clear and failure to do so properly means that you are negligent in that responsibility.

Whereas if you don't do it in the first place, it's not your responsibility.

Which is why I didn't touch the black ice path outside last week which has heavy footfall on a busy street.
Had shovel ready and will power to do my bit but hell i'm not going to get sued by an ambulance chaser. :mad:
Introduce that German law with protection for the shoveller and i'll be out with my shovel next time.