Jump to content
 

The non-railway and non-modelling social zone. Please ensure forum rules are adhered to in this area too!

Modeller forced to dismantle model railway due to H&S concerns


Downendian

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

Modeller Robert Burdock from Buckfastleigh has been told to dismantle loft layout due to Health and Safety concerns. I don't make habit of reading the daily Mail, but this cropped up in a Google search. I haven't seen reference to this story although it's over a year ago.

 

Seems heavy handed to me, I guess not if the roof timbers have been removed and/or rotten, but salient warnings for those playing trains in the loft.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324953/End-line-model-railway-fan-housing-association-demands-dismantle-10-000-train-set-attic-health-safety-grounds.html

 

Neil

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like he's made alterations to a house which he doesn't own and, in doing so, is in breach of a signed agreement. Nothing to do with a model railway as such and nothing to do with elf'n'safety. Typical Daily Wail beat-up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really the overbearing hand of the wicked, evil H&S, though is it, if you read the article?

Chap's chosen to live in a housing association property that has rules regarding alterations to said property (to quote: "Paul Davies, head of asset management, said: 'It is part of our tenancy agreement that tenants must seek permission to make any alterations to our properties so that we can make sure it is safe and meets the required building regulations."). He appears not to have bothered to do this & it's come back to bite him now he wants his chimney repaired. Also note that nowhere does it actually state that he's not allowed to have the railway, just that they need it removed to assess that it's actually safe to be there in the first place (which he should have discussed with them in the first place...). The final two quotes from the housing association are quite telling, I believe (with my emphasis), "We have written to Mr Burdock to explain that all items in the loft space must be removed so that we can gain access and reinstate the timber members to ensure the property is safe", and "Once this work has been done, we will look at ways for Mr Burdock's train set to be accommodated safely."

Typical storm-in-a-teacup
stirring from the Daily Heil...

Link to post
Share on other sites

We had a similar case here in Fairbourne where someone cut and modified roof trusses to accommodate a model layout, without any building regulations approval.  When the house came to be sold some years later, it was seriously devalued because the house was deemed to have a sub standard roof.  What was worse, it was a semi so potentially could have had impacts on next door's roof as well.

 

Building regs are there for a reason and have evolved over the years to protect the public, not to give the Daily Crapwrap a "health and safety gone wrong" story.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really the overbearing hand of the wicked, evil H&S, though is it, if you read the article?

 

Chap's chosen to live in a housing association property that has rules regarding alterations to said property (to quote: "Paul Davies, head of asset management, said: 'It is part of our tenancy agreement that tenants must seek permission to make any alterations to our properties so that we can make sure it is safe and meets the required building regulations."). He appears not to have bothered to do this & it's come back to bite him now he wants his chimney repaired. Also note that nowhere does it actually state that he's not allowed to have the railway, just that they need it removed to assess that it's actually safe to be there in the first place (which he should have discussed with them in the first place...). The final two quotes from the housing association are quite telling, I believe (with my emphasis), "We have written to Mr Burdock to explain that all items in the loft space must be removed so that we can gain access and reinstate the timber members to ensure the property is safe", and "Once this work has been done, we will look at ways for Mr Burdock's train set to be accommodated safely."

 

Reminds me of the characters who tend to ignore established rules in the quest, for example, to satisfy their own curiosity or possibly compulsive behaviour. Sawing through or removing RSJs to make space for something else is but one manifestation.

 

Best-known example I can think of was the late Fred Dibnah, who turned his back garden into a 70ft-deep mine shaft, leading to fears from some neighbours that it could lead to a weakening / collapse of neighbouring foundations.

 

Then there was the council tenant (i think he was either in Camden or Hackney) who, over the course of several years and for no particular reason, created an entire system of tunnels underneath his home, and also that of neighbouring properties! The full extent of the system was only discovered after he died! I think he was nicknamed "Rat Man" at one stage.

 

Where exactly did that £10k price tag for the train set come from?   (No need to answer I think I can guess.......)

 

Maybe he's a regular customer of Gosturde?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm....I'm not so sure.

 

He say's that he has merely floored and boarded it.

 

Looks to me like the adjacent house is identical so a quick check of that loft would prove one way or the other whether structural timbers have been removed.

 

If he hasn't removed any timbers, then he probably hasn't affected the structural integrity of the house.

 

(Okay, there's the issue of the extra weight up there.)

 

I would have thought that a surveyor could remove a bit of the flooring, a bit of the cladding and have a general poke around to make an initial assessment WITHOUT him having to remove the entire layout. At that stage, if there are any remaining doubts then yes, it's gonna have to come out, but I do just wonder whether the demand to remove it immediately is just a bit heavy handed, and whether there's really any problem with it all, apart from the fact that he didn't ask first.

 

Without knowing for certain whether or not timbers were removed I remain open minded about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Simon I did search, but nothing showed up.

Happy for mods to lock if a link to original threads are identified.

Still - I think it's a valuable lesson not to interfere with the structural integrity of where you live to find a place to house the railway. we don't know for sure this is what has been done, but Pyewipe's quote from the article suggest they may have been. I know I had a particularly intrusive A beam in my 1950s house, but wouldn't touch it with a barge pole. My railway is now in a spare room, and daughter 1 gained the loft for their penthouse suite when the boyfriend moved in.

 

Edit : still no sign of this story on RMweb with several search strings.

Neil

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

 

Reminds me of the characters who tend to ignore established rules in the quest, for example, to satisfy their own curiosity or possibly compulsive behaviour. Sawing through or removing RSJs to make space for something else is but one manifestation.

 

Best-known example I can think of was the late Fred Dibnah, who turned his back garden into a 70ft-deep mine shaft, leading to fears from some neighbours that it could lead to a weakening / collapse of neighbouring foundations.

 

Then there was the council tenant (i think he was either in Camden or Hackney) who, over the course of several years and for no particular reason, created an entire system of tunnels underneath his home, and also that of neighbouring properties! The full extent of the system was only discovered after he died! I think he was nicknamed "Rat Man" at one stage.

 

 

Maybe he's a regular customer of Gosturde?

There was a guy in Kelevdon, Essex who wanted a basement, not for a model railway. When nearly complete his house fell into it, it didn't do much good to the other houses in the terrace. :O

 

You get other people who build extensions without permission. One example comes to mind of a chap who built over the top of a sewer manhole. He wanted to sue the water company when his new kitchen filled up with his neighbours' doings. Things weren't helped when his was building the new extension he was washing out the cement mixer and pouring the slurry down the manhole he later covered over. :scratchhead: :scratchhead:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The bloke is a builder!

 

Anyone on the local area who has used him ought to get things checked out.  Unless there's some missing information on the structural work it sounds like a real cowboy job.  And I bet he isn't a qualified electrician, so anything more than simple electrics will be illegal too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...