To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
1 Comment
I think this should be fixed by adding a new handrail.
Firstly, this is absolutely a risk which would require rectification under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). However, that legislation is reactive in that a local authority would first need to inspect and then issue some form of notice or order requiring the works. If there were an inspection, there is no doubt such a notice would be issued.
Whether it needs doing under other legislation is less clear.
It’s certainly not a section 11 repairing obligation because I don’t think it is “out of repair”.
However, it is possible that it could be a defect as defined under section 4 Defective Premises Act 1972.
In this recent case, the landlord was held liable for damages where a plumber fell due to a lack of a handrail. However, in that case there was a handrail which had been removed (and so was out of repair because the landlord should have put it back). The position is less clear where there was no handrail in the first place.
I wouldn’t like to take the chance though for the relative small amount it would cost to install a handrail compared to the legal costs of defending such a claim!