Doormats branded health and safety menace by Brighton council (From The Argus)
Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.
Doormats branded health and safety menace by Brighton council
12:10pm Tuesday 9th February 2010 in
Tenants have been ordered to scrap their doormats - because they’re a health and safety menace.
Fuming residents, who branded the council dictat “ridiculous”, have been told if they don’t shift their homely welcome mats, they will all be binned.
Hilda Tullett, was just one of the tenants to receive the Brighton and Hove City Council note telling her to scrap the mat.
The 60-year-old of Heron Court, Swanborough Place, Whitehawk, Brighton, said: “Fire inspectors came round looking at safety.
“They said there should be absolutely nothing at all in the hallway and we had until the end of the month to take everything out.
“I can understand plant pots and all the rest of it having to go but not our doormats.
“I have had mine since I moved in here 18 years ago.
“We were told if we did not remove them they would take them away and dump them."
A council spokesman said the decision was taken as a result of recommendations by fire safety experts.
He said not all council properties were affected, only those where obstructions in communal hallways were considered a hazzard.
He added: “We apologise if this decision appears petty but this is in the interests of health and safety.
“We have to ensure that any commonway areas are clear in the unlikely event of a fire where vision could be hampered by smoke.
“This is about the safety of all our residents which is, of course, our top priority.”
Comments(43)
Angryoldman
says...
12:23pm Tue 9 Feb 10
Every flat every council block are no longer allowed to pretty the landings and window sills up with a plants like they have been doing for decades. And now the doormatts have to go. What about the health and safety of children crawling on carpets covered in dogs muck because people arent allowed to wipe their feet on entering homes. I'm waiting for the national papers to get hold of this one.
The council are fools. Jobsworths or what.
davyboy
says...
12:23pm Tue 9 Feb 10
peebee9
says...
12:28pm Tue 9 Feb 10
Angryoldman
says...
12:31pm Tue 9 Feb 10
I think its time to call for a serious reduction in council staff. They obviously have nothing to do, and charge the earth in council tax to bring in yet nore strangle holds on even the most simplest of what freedoms we have left. They should be sacked!
HoveLawn
says...
12:38pm Tue 9 Feb 10
workingmama
says...
12:48pm Tue 9 Feb 10
However silly it may seem to some, maybe you should all remember the fire in Camberwell last year where 6 people died. One of the causes of the fire spreading was things like stored items, door mats (yes door mats), plants etc igniting in the hallways and causing the fire to spread.
Brightonscouse2
says...
12:57pm Tue 9 Feb 10
High Wire
says...
1:04pm Tue 9 Feb 10
workingmama wrote:Totally agree. Peebee9 calls them 'stupid rules' but what is more important - being able to exit a building safely in an emergency or someone's "right" to keep an 18 year old door mat in a public area? It's the council's building and they'll be the ones held liable if health and safety rules aren't upheld. Put your own doormat inside your own door if it's that important to you.
Acutally a doormat can be tripped up on and that is the reason they are deemed a safety risk in blocks of flats. If a hallway is full of smoke and people are rushing to get out, it is easy to trip. However silly it may seem to some, maybe you should all remember the fire in Camberwell last year where 6 people died. One of the causes of the fire spreading was things like stored items, door mats (yes door mats), plants etc igniting in the hallways and causing the fire to spread.
Angryoldman
says...
1:07pm Tue 9 Feb 10
workingmama wrote:Will they be removing door steps as well? They too can be tripped on.
Acutally a doormat can be tripped up on and that is the reason they are deemed a safety risk in blocks of flats. If a hallway is full of smoke and people are rushing to get out, it is easy to trip. However silly it may seem to some, maybe you should all remember the fire in Camberwell last year where 6 people died. One of the causes of the fire spreading was things like stored items, door mats (yes door mats), plants etc igniting in the hallways and causing the fire to spread.
Open windows and flames catching curtains alight was actually the main cause of the spread of the said fire. NOT DOORMATS!
Will the council be banning net curtains and open windows?
People trip on high heels. Will the council be banning high heels in its premises?
Total overkill and you know it.
workingmama
says...
1:22pm Tue 9 Feb 10
It is definatly not overkill. I am a tenant and can fully understand why the council are requesting hallways to be kept totally clear.
I would imagine the council are acting on the advise of the fire service and as it is the fire and rescue who put out fires I am sure they know what they are talking about and why they are advising that all communal hallways are kept clear. Its not being done just to rid tenants of their joy of having a pound shop door mat outside their flat.
And no one said doormats were the main cause of the fire, but they can ignite and be tripped up on as I said before making exit routes dangerous.
Officeboy
says...
1:25pm Tue 9 Feb 10
Officeboy
says...
1:28pm Tue 9 Feb 10
bug eye
says...
1:28pm Tue 9 Feb 10
PrestigeLyon
says...
1:32pm Tue 9 Feb 10
Angryoldman
says...
1:38pm Tue 9 Feb 10
PrestigeLyon wrote:Mmmm. The great fire of London in 1666?
Doormats have been responsible for some of the worst fires in history. It's the right move.
Maybe Nero's doormat was responsible for the burning of Rome?
If only B&H council had been there, history could have been changed.
AngieRS
says...
1:48pm Tue 9 Feb 10
And we can't put the mats inside because of the simple reason that the new doors being fitted are so close to the floor, you can't open them if you have any more than a couple of letters. I'd like to see a comment from the fire brigade about these so-called fire hazards. All we've had is what they council has told us.
It's a shame this council isn't quite so energetic in seeing about the appalling waste of money that's gone into painting the tower blocks in and around Kemptown. Talk about a bodge. Still, it's the same old story, money grabbing private contractors and ineffectual oversight from the council.
Angryoldman
says...
1:59pm Tue 9 Feb 10
No need for napalm. Just find a group of Talliban and drop a highly combustable Brighton doormat on them. If they dont get wiped out in the inferno they would certainly trip on the dangerous and deadly Brighton doormat and fall over and be captured.
AngieRS
says...
2:12pm Tue 9 Feb 10
scthetruth
says...
3:00pm Tue 9 Feb 10
AngieRS wrote:Quangos - I mean local Councillors, must be the most hated individuals in Britain except MP's of course.
Yes, maybe we could have Improvised Explosive Doormats!
Boris D
says...
3:03pm Tue 9 Feb 10
censored
says...
3:09pm Tue 9 Feb 10
For the same reason, I've been told that rubbish bags can't be left outside the door. We usually put it outside the flat to take down on our next trip. But that's a fire risk, apparently.
It's not worth trying to point out that it's safer outside in the corner outside the door where it isn't in the way, whereas it would block the corridor of my flat if left on the inside.
MKWirral
says...
3:15pm Tue 9 Feb 10
.
Not a hazard there then?
MKWirral
says...
3:22pm Tue 9 Feb 10
Would there be much left inside the property? ....
No! because the property itself would be considered a hazard and require pulling down ....
We would then all return to the caves .... and learn how to start a fire to live.
ICantThinkOfAName
says...
3:36pm Tue 9 Feb 10
Gaz the great
says...
3:49pm Tue 9 Feb 10
She-Ra, Princess Of Power
says...
4:41pm Tue 9 Feb 10
They're asking you to remove items and mats from the hallways so that you don't have the chance to trip over anything in the event of a fire. What is your problem? It's for your own safety :)
I appreciate it seems overkill, but let's face it, if they were left there and someone died as a result of falling and not being able to get out in a fire you'd all be up in arms about how the council never told you to remove them.
Oh and as for the comment about dog muck getting in the house cos people don't have anywhere to wipe their feet - uh, hello? How many people do you know who would deliberately tread dog muck in their house cos they couldn't wipe their feet....? :)
RickH
says...
4:47pm Tue 9 Feb 10
censored wrote:I would suggest that the obvious difference is who is exposed to risk (fire or evacuation as result of fire) as a result of your behaviour: with one its only the residents of your dwelling; with the other you place a risk on all those who use the communal landing. I would have thought it was fairly obvious that one!
A doormat outside is NOT going to hamper you any more than the clutter most people have in the hallway on the private side of the door. For the same reason, I've been told that rubbish bags can't be left outside the door. We usually put it outside the flat to take down on our next trip. But that's a fire risk, apparently. It's not worth trying to point out that it's safer outside in the corner outside the door where it isn't in the way, whereas it would block the corridor of my flat if left on the inside.
yorkie44
says...
5:32pm Tue 9 Feb 10
AngieRS
says...
5:43pm Tue 9 Feb 10
Christophe Hawtree
says...
9:16pm Tue 9 Feb 10
Cara_G
says...
12:23am Wed 10 Feb 10
Angryoldman
says...
7:25am Wed 10 Feb 10
It is a fact that many people have drowned over the years and many people have been injured on rocks and broken glass or been stung by jellyfish. On the other hand I could find no record of death by doormat.
So considering that there is most certainly a danger and a risk to the public on the council’s beaches, shouldn’t the council be closing our beaches to the public?
Reading the posts from some council supporters on here, wouldn’t the council simply be acting on our interests? If no one was allowed on the beaches no one could drown or be injured.
Tye
says...
8:15am Wed 10 Feb 10
HoveLawn wrote:the modern equivalent of "Let them eat cake"?
If you dont like it, why not rent privately?
The Health and safety executive would NEVER ban a door mat
- Its I'm sure some paper pusher trying to justify their job and their existance but with no legal experience, terrified of getting sued BUT as they went on an expensive one day course in a really nice hotel they are now the councils elf'n'safetee supremo and feel as though they must come up with something
SAD SAD STUPIDITY
coach03
says...
9:43am Fri 12 Feb 10
Firstly, doormats are not a risk - they are a potential hazard (correctly stated but mis-spelt in the article). The risk comes from assessing the hazard and the likelihood of an event occurring resulting in damage or injury. There are standard processes for this simple assessment and it should not result in sweeping changes but more a case of managing each POTENTIAL risk.
What this boils down to is the maniacal obsession with not leaving yourself open to a potential lawsuit, IF an event should occur, IF someone should get injured and IF the injured party has a 'make a quick buck' mind set leading them to try and sue the council for breaching their duties. The council of course, will just settle out of court instead of taking the stance that this would be madness of the first order, contrary to most right thinking society members' approach to life and be prepared to set thir case :- which should be, assess the hazard, the likelihood an event would occur and the likelihood of potential damage or injury.
Using my grid - this would be a "1" on a scale of "9" - it's hardly worth talking about.
Angryoldman
says...
8:03am Sat 13 Feb 10
coach03 wrote:Yes. I totally agree.
I am sure that this will be nothing to do with the HSE and much more to do with ill-informed officers unable to properly conduct risk assessments. Firstly, doormats are not a risk - they are a potential hazard (correctly stated but mis-spelt in the article). The risk comes from assessing the hazard and the likelihood of an event occurring resulting in damage or injury. There are standard processes for this simple assessment and it should not result in sweeping changes but more a case of managing each POTENTIAL risk. What this boils down to is the maniacal obsession with not leaving yourself open to a potential lawsuit, IF an event should occur, IF someone should get injured and IF the injured party has a 'make a quick buck' mind set leading them to try and sue the council for breaching their duties. The council of course, will just settle out of court instead of taking the stance that this would be madness of the first order, contrary to most right thinking society members' approach to life and be prepared to set thir case :- which should be, assess the hazard, the likelihood an event would occur and the likelihood of potential damage or injury. Using my grid - this would be a "1" on a scale of "9" - it's hardly worth talking about.
I think the council need to look at their own serious failings before picking on all residents.
I live in a high rise. I'm sure fire regulations state there should be smoke alarms and a fire extinguisher on each communal level.
There are none of these in our block.
Now that is a serious risk.
The council need to start practicing what it preaches.
Old Ladys Gin
says...
2:10pm Sat 13 Feb 10
So can bikes, plower pots, and anything else that would stop people, and people in a panic as well, leaving a building.
Angryoldman
says...
5:53pm Sat 13 Feb 10
Smoking actually kills tens of thousands of people a year. Will they ban it? No! Thought not.
Why stop at council tenants. People in the private housing sector and people who own their own homes have just as mutch chance of 'tripping up'
How about government legislation to ban ALL doormats?
I think you miss the point. Google "Nanny State"
There is a story on the BBC about Valentines cards being banned in schools and the reason?
Those who dont get a card "might" feel rejected.
Pathetic!!!!!!!
Old Ladys Gin
says...
12:44pm Sun 14 Feb 10
Terry Walpole
says...
3:19am Mon 15 Feb 10
If only Dresden had H&S gestapo, er..I mean inspectors as Brighton has.
BrightonJames
says...
8:29pm Mon 22 Feb 10
Old, Tatty Rugs/ bits of Carpet, YES they are a hazard, Yes they are Not looked after, And Tenants Rent the Flat inside.. NOT the landings/windows of communal area's, And How is estate dept' suppose to Clean with a Mop & Bucket Carpet??, Tenants would Soon complain it they tripped or if the landings were not kept Clean..?
Remember It's INSIDE Past your front Door YOU rent, Not the whole Block...??
My Block, I hope they Do get to take up these tread bear, flea ridden mats that have Not been cleaned in Years.
AngieRS
says...
1:46am Sun 28 Feb 10
1183
says...
8:21pm Thu 4 Mar 10
More News stories
- Man gives Brighton Google car the two finger salute
- Skateboarding Brighton dog could get As-bone
- Hove MP's 50p milk expenses claim
- Brighton school slams zombie apocalypse Twitter claims
- Rottingdean rev's warning after "Staying Alive" funeral blunder
- Brighton charity creates knitted living room
- Barefoot runners to descend on Brighton
- Rapping councillor stars in Hove community video
- Is this Sussex's slowest letter?
- Sussex swiggers send mead sales soaring
Most popular
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Rostrum says...
12:17pm Tue 9 Feb 10
What is the evidence that door-mats have or do caused a problem?