How good are evac chairs?

Sally Jones
Member - 2 posts

David, I feel very similar to do you and do not think that Evac Chairs are good. They are not a means of escape that should be depended on for disabled employees as I believe they could potentially do more harm then good.

I have been on many fire safety courses and from these courses believe that the safest option for a disabled employee is to be placed behind a fire door with another employee until the Fire Brigade attend site.

Anonymous

I believe Evac Chairs are potentially more dangerous than helpful. Apart from the availability of trained users issues, which other have highlighted, there are, I think, significant risks both to the person being carried and to those being assisted. What if an accident happened in the process? You could end up with more people being placed in jeopardy. A fire officer advised me to leave it to the professionals - we should all have 30 minutes fire protection which is well within target times for the fire brigade to attend and deal with the situation. The most important consideration has to be communication - if you have to keep people in the building, make sure that someone at ground level knows this.

Colin Macrae
Member - 1 post

As well as being difficult to transfer into the EVAC chairs are really uncomfortable with the attendant problem of causing back problems.

Anonymous

When the Evac chair is going down the stairs it is easy to control and feels safe. The difficult part is the fine balance required when transfering from landing to stairs, with the attendant fear of tipping the occupant down the stairs. Turning from one flight to another can also be difficult if the landing is less than two metres wide. Having spent some time practising with this chair, I am unhappy using it with a live occupant.

Anonymous

We have two of these units and they are used as a last resort, our staff are trained to operate them if they are required. There are two elements not mentioned, 1. the person may refuse to get into the chair and 2. It is the building operator/owners responsibility to evacuate their customers/staff not the fire authority. The evac chairs are the only device's available to tackle the problem at the moment. We do, as a 2nd measure have designated "refuges" which are marked and are located strategically around the buildings this is where persons unable to evacuate the building are taken and accompanied by a member of staff until it is deemed too dangerous to remain when the chairs are used.

Anonymous

A further problem in the use of evac chairs is that it, if the trained operative is located on a floor below that of the chair location it is impossible to reach the chair as it would mean walking agianst the flow of people escaping down the stairs.

Barry Scholes
Member - 1 post

How good are Evac+Chairs?

Barry Scholes ? Managing Director of Evac+Chair International Ltd

I hope you fellow network members will allow me to respond to some of the comments expressed in this forum. It is easy to criticise a good product, but bad news travels fast and can quickly become endemic. I have been in the business of ?evacuation? for 18 years and know the inventor of the Evac+Chair personally. His wife had poliomyelitis as a child and wears a leg calliper. After three floor levels walking downstairs is an impossibility for her. Unfortunately, she was in New York on the 69th floor of the Empire State Building when a power blackout occurred. She waited six hours before power was restored. That was in 1982. In the Eiffel Tower a young, fit man descended from the top elevation via the stairs, encountered difficulty breathing and collapsed. The middle elevation was 300 ft below. Fortunately, an Evac+Chair was on hand to assist. In the fire at Sainsbury?s a few years? ago the fire was unseen and unheard as a flashover took place in the false ceiling above the heads if its customers. A flashover can take hold within five minutes and smoke can kill in three minutes.

I merely use these as true examples of what really can happen in an emergency. The concept of safe refuges, as recommended in the Building Regulations 5588, pt 8, is abhorrent to me. It would be better to leave the building with one?s colleagues than be left behind in the hope that the Fire Service will search every floor in the building. ?The Armageddon of the Fire Service is to find people trapped in a building on their arrival?, John Clenaghan, former Strathclyde Divisional Chief Training Officer (retired). The concept of safe refuges puts lives at risk, both rescuer and rescuee. Did you know that firemen no longer practise a fireman?s lift; it is against the manual handling legislation.

Of course, there are issues that need to be addressed in cases of severe disabilities, such as brittle bone syndrome, additional provisions for comfort, etc. However, I can achieve a stairway evacuation using the Evac+Chair well within the prescribed time allowed, and comfort doesn?t really come into it The key is a managed, strategic evacuation plan. Evac+Chairs need to be part of a total evacuation plan, including adequate training of sufficient personnel to achieve that. If anyone disagrees with this please contact me. The Evac+Chair is a tool, but it solves problems and can save lives!

John Clenaghan
Member - 5 posts

I have just came accross this article and see that my name was used by Barry Scholes. I was a senior member of the Fire Brigade for 32 years and perhaps understand the effects of smoke and how it travels more than those who have never been in a fire situation.

The evac-chair, I beleive is one if not the best methods available to get persons out of a burning building in the safest mode and in the quickest time.

Reading some of the comments I wondered whether those making the comments would like to be left in a building where a fire is progressing, whether you are the disabled person, or the worker charged with looking after the disbaled person in a room with the door closed. Let me tell you the last resort would be to leave the person in the room and I would not recommend leaving a staff member with the perosn (Would you pick a straw to see who would be the unlucky guy).

Fire and smoke are killers, most, if not all people in a fire die from the effects of smoke.

My concern would be that in a fire situation; and I have seen my quota, including a few deaths. Is that DOORS are never kept closed unless you have a pro-active safety culture in you workplace or a fire plan in your home. a large majority of the building I now visit in my capacity as a Fire Advisor have doors wedged open and some with magnetic catches are defective in one way or another.

Yes you have, as was rightly said at least 30 mins fire resistance in the building, as long as all the fire safety measures are 100% - most are not.

Finally I would urge those who have the evac-chair to make sure that

1. staff are trained in their understanding of use and deployment

2. The best way out of a building if you have an impairment and cannot walk like the people who are critical of the equipment - is by the EVAC-CHAIR.

If I was taken out to a place of refuge on the 6th or 21st floor of a building and informed "just wait here I will inform the Fire Brigade you are here" I would be out of the wheel chair or whatever and crawling down the stairs.

Get real, Smoke kills, and until the Government decide to instal sprinklers in every building then people will get trapped and die, and if you have the luxury of the evac-chair then use it, if you don't have one encourage your employer to get one or more.

Remember - YOU have a duty of care, which is extended in an emergency.

Anonymous

I cannot believe the short-sightedness in some of the comments made here.

I completely agree with John Clenaghan.

It is worrying to think that it is acceptable to have 'second rate' fire safety procedures for those with disabilities.

Surely the issue is that in a real emergency the chair can save a life. It may not be the most comfortable or speediest (that depends on how well people are trained) of evacuations, but it acheives the right result - everyone gets evacuated.

We purchased a chair about two years ago. Fortunatley we have never had to use it in a real emergency, but we have used it in several evacuations. We have encouraged participation in training events so that the user of the chair feels more comfortable, and we ALWAYS ensure that trained assistants are in the same location as the chair. Surely it defeats the object if trained operatives arent on the same floor as the user?

Until a better alternative comes along, which i find hard to believe, were sticking with the chair.

Anonymous

I totally agree with John Clenaghan's comments and have one thing to add.

The Disability Rights Commission has produced a briefing on the use of refuges, in which they state that 'There is no document which states that disabled people should be left in a building to wait for emergency services during a fire Situation - all people should be evacuated if there is a fire'.

Apart from the obvious risk to life, employers and those in control of premises who leave disabled persons in a refuge could also be guilty of discrimination.

True evac-chairs may not be the solution in all circumstances. Far better to have a claim from an employee for a minor handling injury than a death from fire. Who would want to make the decision to leave someone?

Paul Ashenden
Member - 5 posts

I have read with some interest the comments about the use of Evac Chairs and judging by the number of responses it is a keen topic. I must say i cannot believe that their are safety professionls that think the ideal situation is to leave a person behind a fire door and wait for the fire services to turn up! This is everything but a safe system of work!!!! Fire refuge points are very limited and should the fire be a big one there is a foreseeable chance of a building collapse or part collapse would lead to the integretary of the refuge point been breached, even a slight collapse could allow toxic fumes to enter the area which are more likly to kill that the fire itself. In addition to this it is unfair to espect fire crews to enter a building under such conditions. As for the point of whos trained this is a safety management problem which is easily overcome. We have on site about 12 trained Evac users who receive a auto e mail every 3 months requesting that the carry out a test evac ( we find it takes about 10 Minutes) and every 12 months our audit team check their log books to ensure that they have carried out the training as requsted. In conclusion it looks very nice to have refuge points and safe zones etc but i wonder how many people would volunteer to stay in a burning building rather that having a bumpy ride to a place of safety via a Evac chair.

Anonymous

I have experience of using Evac+Chairs in practice situations (both as operator and occupant) and whilst agreeing that they can be very useful for the evacuation of non-ambulant persons, also appreciate the problems that some may experience in their use. They are no use for evacuation up stairs from below final exit level storeys and may be difficult with stairways incorporating several landings or with non-standard stairs (winders, helicals, historic, etc). You can only take one person at a time in a chair so you may need several chairs available at the right place at the time needed. It is regrettable that the old concept of leaving disabled persons for rescue by the fire brigade is still around and that the reason for refuges as places to await assisted evacuation by building management is not appreciated. More publicity is urgently needed on this point. The British Standard to consult is BS5588-8:1999 'Fire Precautions in the Design, Construction and Use of Buildings - Part 8: Code of Practice for Means of escape for Disabled People'. It is notable that this states that 'it is generally preferable for a wheelchair bound person to be carried in their own chair'. It can be difficult to get people to act as fire wardens and there can be resistance to the use of Evac+Chairs from them, their trade union representatives and disabled persons. I believe that it can be all too easy to put a few Evac+Chairs around the building and consider this to be sufficient without having proper evacuation plans suitable for the building and its occupants. This is of particular concern in the design of new buildings - where I believe that the incorporation of evacuation lifts should be seriously considered and current Approved Documents to the Building Regulations revised to give due prominence to them. Legislation is now giving disabled persons increased rights of access to premises and it's time for fire safety provision to catch up.

Nathan Rivers
Member - 1 post

Firstly we have a responsibility to ensure safe access and egress. One of the first questions asked by our clients who may have a disability is: - how will you get me out of this building in an emergency? A refuge area is not good enough. We have evacuation chairs in our buildings, and ensure enough people are trained, holidays are covered - it is part of minimising risks in an emergency and ensuring at all times the buildings are a safe environment to be in. Yes it can happen that people do not want to use the evacuation chair - especially practice. But giving people more options in the event of an emergency is so much better than, in some cases none.

Anonymous

I would agree with the comments made by John Clenaghan. In the event of an emergency in any of our buildings, if I were unable to use the stairs I would rather crawl out on my hands and knees than be left in a "safe area". Also, who would you ask or expect to stay with me??

The Evac chair is the answer to a number of problems relating to evacuation of staff either disabled or unable to use the stairs for whatever reason. I believe that if you have nominated staff trained and good procedures in place then the chairs are worth their weight in gold.

We have chairs in all our offices and set procedures in place. There should be no lifting implications if it is done properly.

On an organised evacuation carried out recently we evacuated the whole building in two minutes and the Evac Chair operators brought out a " Live Victim" in 5 minutes.

It gets my vote every time!

Anonymous

I amy be but I suspect that none of the correspondents are disabled. Has anyona actualy asked a disabled person if they would pefer to be left in a refuge area or evacuated by chair. In the attack on the World Trade Centre it took the fire brigade 1 hour from their arrival to reach the 30th floor using the stairs.That is a good time considering its uphill all the way and they were carrying fire fighting equipment. From this we can deduce, allowing for the time it takes the fire service to arrive after the alarm has been raised, a half hour fire refuge will be no good what so ever above the 10th floor of a building. In the 21st century can we not build a lift with the reliability and protection needed to evacuate disabled people in an emergency?

Anonymous

Yes I have. We have a severely disabled person in one of our offices who kindly agrees to let the nominated operators use him for practise. His comments were he would rather take his chances with the Evac chair than be left in a burning building.

Also, should we be placing such a huge responsibility on the Fire Brigade, what if they are involved in an accident or something impedes them on the way to the fire, the 30 minutes suggested would soon run out, and we would more than lkikely have a dead colleague on our conscience.

So from my point of view there is no argument about using the Evac chair.

Anonymous

As a retired fire officer myself and currently the Health and Safety Manager for an organisation that makes good use of evac chairs I fully agree with John Clenaghans comments. Anyone who has experience of a fire in a building will know how rapidly fire can spread and the panic that can quickly set in amongst anyone who is unable to promptly evacuate. A simple risk assessment will tell you which is the safest option. Obviously there are training and manual handling implications but these problems are not insurmountable. One way of reducing the risk during training is by using a training manequin of the type used by fire brigades. These are available in a variety of different sizes and weights and are excellent for confidence building. Some of the buildings I am responsible for have circular staircases which are not suitable for the "evac " chair but there are other similar chairs on the market which can be used on curved staircases.

Anonymous

Like John I was also a Senior Fire Officer for many years.I am currently employed as a Fire Safety Adviser for a large Local Authority. We make extensive use of refuges and Evac Chairs in many of our buildings.

The point most people are missing is that it is the Managements responsibility to evacuate ALL people from the building in an emergency.

A glance at BS 5588 Part 8 states quite clearly the there has to be a Management procedure in place for evacuation. It is NOT the Fire Brigades responsibility to evacuate building users. Obviously they will assist if people are still in the building when they arrive.

Too many managers opt out of their responsibilities. An Evac chair with properly trained staff will provide one method of evacuation. As has been stated they are not suitable for all persons and training of staff should cover that aspect.

Anonymous

Evac chairs have there place in the management of an evacuation procedure. The question as I see it is not the usefulness of the chair is not the issue. but the number of chairs and trained personnel etc. In a multi storey multi core public building how many chairs,. If you have at the time of the incident 6 disabled persons and 5 chairs who gets left behind, since you do not re-enter a building.

Anonymous

This debate is very timely as I am currently helping to design disabled access to the upper floors of a building which will be on display to the paying public. The key to the issue is the Management procedure, but the building owners seem inclined to rely on the Fire Brigade's offer to evacuate people, on the basis that the owners cannot make it an OBLIGATION on their staff to stay in the building and help evacuation, but can only rely on them volunteering.

Has anyone any views on this in terms of Conditions of Employment? Or if the staff are not paid but volunteers? It all seems contrary to the responsibilities identified in the comments so far.

Anonymous

Okay - question - all the comments above appear to be related to buildings where there are many people etc.

What are your views on the evacuation of severely disabled clients being cared for in their own homes where there may only be one employee present and who would usually use a hoist to move the client.

In the event of fire occurring whilst the employee is present what would you expect that employee to do?

Bear in mind the client may be on the first floor/basement flat, toxic smoke movement through the typical home dwelling is exceptionally fast and handling that client manually will have an exceptionally high level of risk particularly in relation to handling injuries to the employee. Also, we cannot force service users to have smoke alarms fitted, 25% or so of the population smoke and that the standard and age of appliances and wiring can be very poor.

Anonymous

The legal position with regard to evacuation by disabled persons is different in private domestic premises from that in workplaces, GT and, in the circumstances you describe, I would expect the employee to call the fire brigade and to do what any reasonable neighbour might be expected to do to help the disabled person using what is available at the time. However, now is the time to advise clients of the value in escape plans, automatic fire detection, fire blankets, portable extinguishers, etc - before the incident occurs.

With regard to your point, Lindsay, I take it that you are now also seeking to design means of escape as well as access. I do believe that these two should go together and that we should consider engineering means wherever reasonably practicable rather than just going for the refuge/Evac+chair method in the first instance. [You may have noticed my interest in evacuation lifts stated above].

As to relying upon volunteers as Evac+chair operators, whilst this often seems to be the practice, there would appear to be a duty upon employers and persons in control of workplaces to actually give suitable persons this duty when Evac+chairs have been installed as there is (as some of us have stated above) a duty to actually achieve evacuation of workplaces and not to leave disabled people in 'refuges'.

Anonymous

I have watched the debate with interest and a certain amount of horror in what has been said.

As an above knee amputee I would have know quarms in getting in an evac chair, if it means I leave the building with eveyone else............thats social inclusion, and that is what I am trying to promote as an access auditor.

I have promoted evac chairs because they save lives, and may save mine one day. In 9 1 11 the evac chairs saved lives, dozens died in save refuges.

As a government officer I have to propose evacuation not only for fire but more likely bomb! or terrorist attack!

would you still want to sit at a refuge point with a bomb in the building, remember the staff will think its a fire when the alarms go off! To tell people its a bomb will spread panic!

I totally agree with Barry Scoles & John Clenaghan, as an Access Auditor I will continue to promote evac chairs as a disabled person they are all we have got, or you can queue up behind me as I negotiate the stairs slowly, I would personally never stay in a refuge, the days of a fire fighter charging in and throwing me over his shoulder are long gone!!

Anonymous

We are a Higher Education establishment, in many of our areas of our buildings there is no 'static' population, both staff and students come and go using these areas for short duration. The problem with training volunteers to use evac chairs is that there is no gurantee the volunteers will be in the right place when an emergency occurs?

Lecturers already have their hands full ensuring that their students evacuate the building and directing non ambulant persons to fire refuge points. Legally our procedures can not rely on Students to help their fellow students. Has anyone got any advice or suggestions in these circumstances?

Anonymous

It has been mentioned that evac chairs and the like are the only means of evacuating people from buildings other than by evacuation lift or fire brigade.

I believe that carrying sheets should be evaluated and if prooved effective should be available in addition to evac-chairs.

One point that I have recently raised is that carrying sheets can be carried around by wheelchair users and be under the direct control and direction of the person being evacuated (if self propelled "bum-shuffling" or lifting wheelchair is not an option).

Furthermore it is possible for carrying sheets to be used in conjunction with back moulds - so that someone who has has a vulnerable skeletal/muscular structure can be lifted in the knowledge that they are not as vulnerable as they might otherwise be.

I was memeber of St. John ambulance for nine years and recieved specialist training in the use of specialist equipment and techniques for rescue. Please understand that the following are my own observations and do not represent the views of St. John Ambulance of which I am no longer a memeber:

Our division carried carrying sheets arround having considered how one lifted and moved someone suffering a heart attack. We found that there were several advantages to moving people (not necessarily people heaving heart attacks). They were very versatile. They do have their limitations. However:

their simplicity (ease of use and training),

the fact that four people could assist (spreading the load),

that the person was not removed from the ground very far (reduce the risk arising from any falls - already a reduced risk because four assistants are used rather than one),

that one didn't need to bend ones back,

that one could lift a person (with little or no stress on a persons torso or limbs - or even heart),

that the evacuee is sitting in and surrounded on four sides by ht sheet (and not perched on top)

and that they are easy to carry (by assistants and or potential evacuee),

all make carrying sheets a serious contender in my view, alongside lifting people in their wheelchairs or if possible - self propelled "bum-shuffling".

Another characteristic of evac chairs that gives rise to concern is that in steering evac chairs one runs the risk of tipping. Illustrations show only one assistant. Two would be preferable!

Indeed there is simpler equivalent carried by ambulances - I have used them and been carried in one (when I dislocated my knee cap!). They have their uses in the right hands. Incidentally, I should have never been moved using this mode of rescue - but that is another story...

Please please will someone out there be prepared to evaluate carrying sheets alongside other more complicated bits of equipment - which although they have their place have their limitations and risks - and are not the only answer to evacuation.

Mike Leahy
Member - 1 post

Please lets stop talking about "Evac Chair" this is a trade name and you should be aware that there is a similar chair that I import that we call the evacuation chair.I do understand and agree that this is not the forum for advertising but as Barry Scholes as mentioned his Comany I feel no concern in doing the same.

Apart from marketing these chairs I am an access auditor with respect to the DDA and have been a guest speaker for IOSH on seminars on "Evacuating Disabled People".

On Thursday I attended a hughely successful and well attended seminar organised by the West Yorkshire Fire Prevention Panel with speakers from all relevant orgainisations including the Disability Rights Commission, Chief Fire Officers, Glyn Evans, advisor to the Fire Brigade Union, CBI, and at least to legal speakers.

The question was asked during the Open Forum and general consensus was that Evacuation chairs are not always the right solution but they are a good one for the majority of disabled people, especially most wheelchair users, people with breathing or heart conditions, ambulant walkers and others who may have climbed stairs or used lifts but who have difficulty leaving at an acceptable speed. I have found that if training is approached head on there should be few issues. Familiarity is the best answer: we all kniow that fully able-bodied people can freeze or panic in an emergency and often try to leave by the same way that they entered: so that annual drills count for little, even with good fire exit & route signage.

I do feel that the more important issue is how to manage the evacuation of wheelchair users who couldn't use an evacuation chair or any other transfer, or who are obese and would be difficult to move in an emegency.n s it reasonable for some users to go further than the ground floor.

Evacuation chairs are excellent when there is a power failure or lift breakdown.

It may be of interest that the seminar on Thursday did conclude that fireman lifts should be used before called upon by fire fighters, evacuation lifts are designed to be used in an emergency and there are many occasions when standard lifts could be used and that this should be fully investigated.

Final thought is that you should be talking to disabled people about this. You'll usually find they have a down to earth approach on all access and egress issues: and after all they are the very centre of this debate.

Colin Saunders
Member - 1 post

I have been very interested to read all the comments on the evacuation of buildings. For over five years I have been running training courses for trainers in the use of evacuation chairs and find that once persons have been shown how to use the equipment correctly they are amazed at how easy and safe the equipment is to use. It is also so possible to work out stratagies to deal with the most difficult of the tasks .. that of dealing with transfer from wheelchair to the evacuation chair. The legal resposibility for everyone's safety lies with the employer. Basically if you can't get out should be in!

Anonymous

I wonder if anyone who is reading this can help me?

I am a student at Cambridge University (UK) studying Manufacturing Engineering. I am currently carrying out a project (in a team of four) in which we have to come up with an idea for a new product that we could potentially take to market. Our team has been particularly interested in developing a product to help disabled people evacuate buildings in the event of an emergency. When we initially came up with the idea we were not aware of the existence of the various evacuation chairs that are available on the market.

However, having read the above posts it would appear that not everyone is happy with the available chairs. I also visited my university library where I found several "evac-chairs" but they bore large signs saying that they could only be used by people who were trained to use them. When I asked at reception whether anyone could tell me about the chairs, I was met with a blank look. The receptionist was very helpful and tried to contact someone that could but she was not able to - I don't know what would happen in an emergency situation! Obviously this is probably due to an ineffective staff-training system but I can't help thinking that there must be a better solution...

What do you think? What would be the optimal solution? Presumably it would be preferable if the "aid" could also function up stairs?

I notice that some of the posts talk about lifts that can be used during a fire etc. but what about in buildings where this is not possible?

I would be really grateful for any help you can provide!

Anonymous

Natalie

The first point you make about the blank look the receptionist gave you is i'm affaid all too common

The duty is on the employer to to give adequate training to employees and in the event of an emergerncy for people to be able to leave the building safely ( theres lots more that could be said here but thats not the point of my response)

I believe if the following could be achived this would be real progress in safety in buildings

1 Chairs can assesnt as well desend steps

2 When on a flat surface the chair can relisticaly be moved, Say over a gravel car cark ( you also need to get away from the building not just out of it)

3 If disabled persons could use the chair on there own

( i realise some disabilites will prevent that)

4 Instructions on use is in easy to understand format

The DDA Guidence notes should help here)

5 Persons who are not consious can be put into the chair without the help of lots of people

6 Persons who cannot be in a seated position can be evacuated Say someone with a spinal injury

I have used evacuation chairs on a number of occasions and the list above in based on real life situations not just a wish list. I hope this helps you with your design process

Paul

Fiona Potts
Member - 10 posts

I have an evac chair in place that was originally put in because we had a wheelchair user within that area. However, I've learned yesterday that he refuses to get into it and when they test it they use a "volunteer!" rather than the person it was initially intended for... He would rather someone slung him over their shoulder and carried him out!

So, in the event of an emergency evacuation, where would we stand legally if no-one was happy to get into it? Would the carrier be sued if they dropped him on the evacuation? Would we be sued (if he was dropped!) because we knew about this beforehand? I know this goes away a bit from the original thread, but it seems there are differing opinions, even amongst the perceived users...!

Any comments would be gratefully received. I'm sure it's going to be a hot debate at my next H&S committee meeting!

Regards,

Fiona.

Anonymous

I fully understand the wheelchair users reluctance to sit in the evac chair, I have sat in one for training purposes and found it nerving. However after a couple of times I felt confident in the chair, what you must realise is that in a real emergency situation, especially if the smell or sight of smoke is evident, most people will want to evacuate safely anyway they can. A good example of this is when persons are assisted down Firefighters ladders, most people would not even contenplate this, but if a situation arises where they feel threatened in an incident, they will, even if they are frightened by heights. In my opinion it is far better to have the evac chair ready available than none at all.

Anonymous

You pose some interesting questions, Fiona.

Given that the employer has permitted access to a person requiring assistance to evacuate in the event of an emergency, the employer will also have a duty to assist the disabled person to evacuate or reach a place of safety - but not in practice drills. This must require a management arrangement for providing competent assistance (including training). Should the employer (or any other person) be considered to have been negligent in providing the planned assistance, there will be the possibility of being sued for any associated loss. As to how a court would decide in any particular circumstances or whether an insurer would settle 'out of court' will remain uncertain. Refusal to leave the building in such an emergency or to co-operate with the provided assistance should be a good defence against the action provided that the escape plan and available assistance was reasonable. Hopefully all this will remain hypothetical.

Another possible cause for civil action would be employers who decide to leave non-ambulant disabled persons and accompanying colleages in buildings to await rescue by the fire brigade and suffer loss as a consequence.

We must have plans to enable everyone to get out. For some disabled people this may involve the use of evacuation chairs - but not all.

Anonymous

My organisation has several evacuation chairs which are regularly maintained. The main difficulty we have is the difficulty in recruiting handlers, particularly in a workplace which is predominantly occupied by female staff who, rightly or wrongly, don't feel confident about using the chairs. We are in the process of a further recruitment drive at present and what volunteers have come forward have invariably been male, from a relatively small contingent. A secondary problem is the perception that the legal requirement for handlers is that they be trained and competent. To be competent the handlers need to practice regularly, either with volunteers or amongst themselves. The practical difficulties that arise here include having the handlers available at the same time and convincing senior managers that time away from core activities should be allocated for practice. The bottom line is that our handlers are trained but not technically competent.The opportunities for future practice are further restricted because the building is open to the public and we can't afford to risk collisions on public staircases. In our case the local FPO has advised us to use the available refuges to await rescue by the emergency services. In the meantime, of course, we have been provided with equipment which we cannot use and barring coercion the situation is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future. This (I think) leaves us in breach of the Provision and Use of Work Related Equipment Regulations. In light of the new Fire legislation we are waiting impatiently for updated advice from our policy makers. But whatever the policy the reality in a small office is that finding volunteer fire wardens, incident control teams etc. is always an uphill struggle. More often than not the same names keep cropping up and, as their careers progress many move to roles which become less and less office-based.

Anonymous

We are currently in the process of introducing the Evac Chair to New Zealand, and have consequently read all the above comments with interest, both positive and negative. I do not suffer from a disability, and therefore am unable to fully put myself in a disabled person?s place. I do believe however that my years of experience in almost every conceivable facet of disability support, gives me a very comprehensive overall insight into many related issues. My wife Shona (a nurse) and I have operated New Zealand?s only inbound tour company specifically set up to help people with even very severe disabilities to see our beautiful country. Universal emergency egress from multistoried buildings has always been on of my concerns. In New Zealand like many countries we are earthquake prone. In actual true terms this is a far more likely risk here than fire, but indeed fire and earthquake often go hand in hand. In such case everyone needs to get out. All fire fighting personnel will be too busy elsewhere to be relied on for assistance. These Evac Chairs are the best concept I have ever seen.

Sure there may be discomfort or apprehension. Winching into a helicopter is not particularly comfortable, and many able-bodied folk are very apprehensive about it. It is also risky, but it has saved thousands of lives.

In some cases I agree neck injuries, as well as several other conditions, could pose the problem of further injury, there is however various types of padding and harnessing arrangements that can minimize or alleviate altogether such risk. Correct handling is paramount, not only of the Evac Chair, but of the disabled person.

Shona and I, many years ago developed our own Nursing Home and retirement Lodge, we were the first in New Zealand to receive government funding for all age groups, we also contracted a support service for spinal injuries. It was taking our own patients and residents on tour, that led to the tour company mentioned earlier. Staff training in all aspects of emergency evacuation as well handling the varying needs of those in our care with disabilities is absolutely paramount.

The New Zealand Fire Service, and their Safety Authorities are very strict on such things, trial evacuations etc being part of our regular routine. As we introduce New Zealand to the Evac Chair, this correct training is one of our first priorities.

I am still having trouble getting around some of the negative comments about something I see as a real life saver. Sure there may be improvements in the future, but right now it is the best option we have.

Anonymous

This is a copy of an artice I have left on many disability sites and may be interested to hear my views ...........

On my many access audit visits up and down the country (UK) I have undertaken DDA audits in many multi storey buildings. As a disabled person and a DDA auditor (Disability Discrimination Act) I am greatly concerned about the DDA recommendations of areas of safe refuge within multi storey buildings. The DDA states that such building should have areas of safe refuge for those unable to manage the stairs in the event of an evacuation.

OK Fine so far. This surely is assuming the emergency is a fire and those in the safe refuge area will ?assumable? be rescued relatively quickly by the fire department if management does not/can not!



I personally do not have a problem with this assuming the safe refuge area has been checked thoroughly but and the big but is would you be happy to remain in an area of safe refuge in a large building if the emergency was say a ?Bomb Scare?? Would it not be better that the DDA regulation is to have Evac chairs in all multi storey buildings with staff equipped to use them? Food for thought wouldn't you say?



As a wheelchair user I fully agree that we should be able to have access to most reasonable public buildings, however as an access auditor I feel if we cant get out of the building safely, we should not be going in it, at least not until those responsible have addressed all issues including egress.

Finally my advice to fellow disabled people is: When entering a building think about how you will get out in an emergency as well as how you will get in.

Anonymous

The current BSI advice on fire evacuation of disabled persons says that the refuge area should only be used while the area is cleared of the able-bodied and that trained staff need then to attend to evacuating the disabled as soon as possible. There are brief guidelines in BS5588:Pt 8:1999 on how to do this for visually disabled and wheelchair handicapped.

Waiting for rescue by the fire brigade should not be an option where there is an available escape route.

Some people feel that some current designs of evac chairs makes them inherently unstable, difficult to use and uncomfortable for both the evacuee and the assistants. A new generation of 'sledge' pattern aids is now becoming available but I have no experience of them in use.

Bomb Threats are a different kettle of fish of which I do have some experience. Evacuation might not be the best option and is subject to police/emergency services risk assessment viz. Manchester M&S van mounted bomb had blast damage bouncing off opposite sides of shopping streets for more than half a mile from the van. There was lots and lots of flying glass (modern architects, planners and building regs approvers please note).

Amongst home-made video footage (you can still hear the alarm bells ringing all over Manchester in the background) I have pictures of shards of tough armoured window glass on the 15th Floor of Arndale House opposite the blast embedded 150mm into partition work 10m from the window. People in the way would not have stood a chance. However a security guard patrolling within one of the concrete stairwells 15m away was unaware that anything had happened until he reached his destination floor.

There is some expectation that fire evacuation of disabled persons will be better addressed in guidance to new fire legislation expected later this year.

Charlie Peel
Member - 39 posts

I have read all of the comments on this chain with much interest. We have one evac chair and have had for several years, during that time several people have been trained in using it and they have left. We have today had a training session run by Egress Assured (01509 829867) where 4 members of staff were trained to not only use the chair but also to train others in how to use the chair. I do feel that this is the way forward for all companies.

Training involves being shown how to use the chair and how to dispel the fear and myth that surrounds its use. I will admit that as a 17 stone ex rugby player I was a fair bit frightened to be in the hands of a chap half my size especially when going over the top stair for the first time. I can understand how a mobility impaired person would feel, especially if there was panic and smoke all around them at the time. After the first fear had subsided, I enjoyed the ride and looked forward to my second trip down the stairs.

As a qualified health & safety professional I was looking for problems, both for the person in the chair and the person operating the chair. If correct procedures are used there are no problems associated with its use, providing that the following criteria are met.

The chair is maintained in good working order.

The persons operating the chair are trained and competent to do so.

The persons operating the chair practice evacuation regularly to maintain their own confidence levels.

Ideally the persons identified as needing assistance with egress by using the chair should be given an opportunity to experience an evacuation as a practice so as to know what to expect in the case of an emergency.

I add this bit because when we were being trained one of our union reps watched us and we pressured him to have a ride, which he did. He later admitted his concern at the start and stated that he had a bad back and that walking down a couple of flights of stairs usually hurt his back, that was why he usually used the lift, but the ride in the evac chair was comfortable, he felt safe, and would rather be evacuated in the chair than have to walk down 2 flights of stairs.

I honestly believe training and familiarity with the equipment is the key issue here.

Murray Parker
Member - 1 post

Can anyone recommend a company that provides evacuation chairs? I am trying to arrange a meeting so that I can discuss some concerns that I have regarding their use.

Anonymous

Martin

Evac Chair International Ltd

Paraid Hse

Weston Lane Birmingham

B113RS

0121 706 6744

www.paraid.co.uk

These are the people who we use to buy and service our chairs

Paul Ashenden

Anonymous

Martin

The following Company import and supply the Van Leeuwen range of evacuation chairs.

Business Support Line

9 Eastbourne Grove

Sketty

Swansea

SA2 9DR

Tel: 0500 004 351 FREE

Charlie Peel
Member - 39 posts

Martin

If you have concerns about their use try talking to Colin Saunders of Egress Assured on 01509 829867. If I understand the situation correctly he used to work for evac chair and is now on his own. He will be able to give you an accurate briefing on the use of these chairs

Anonymous

I recommend the following company who supply, train and maintain our evacuation chairs:

Enable Access

16 Plantagenet Road

Barnet EN5 5JG

Tel: 020 82750375

Anonymous

Working hard on a policy for the company i work for. Evac chairs are a good way forward with a good robust management and staff training programme. Disabled people will in some cases make their own way down from the stairs and some will accept a firemans lift too. The ski chairs in my experience are easy to use and once you have got over the uncertaincy when you are sat in them they are easy to use. When the evac chair is going down the stairs it is easy to control and feels safe. I am stating we have a store evacuation every 6 months with the chairs training incorporated.

Anonymous

I too am an ex fire officer now working as the principle fire safety engineer in a large H&S consultancy.. I find it absolutely alarming that some H&S professionals are putting themselves up as competent in fire safety ans yet recommend that disabled persons remain in a refuge until the arrival of the fire brigade.

John Clenaghans comments are almost right. I think he is wrong when he claims that door provide at least 30 minutes fire resistance. The 30 minutes fire resistance is a nominal time obtained from doors exposed to the standard fire test. In reality doors are not maintained or installed to the same standard as they are under test conditions and so may not last a full 30 minutes - in fact more often than not they are likely to permit the passage of smoke and other combustion products before the full 30 minutes. Of course much will depend on the intensity of the fire.

Also no mention has been made of Progressive Horizontal Evacuation (PHE) as used in many hospitals. This should be a consideration when planning evacuation procedures for disabled persons.

Anonymous

Does anyone know how frequently evac chairs need to be serviced according to fire legislation and guidnace.?

Anonymous

Dear Anon
The easy and I guess correct answer to this question is "In accordance with manufacturers instructions" - Hope this helps

Anonymous

All equipment for fire safety should be serviced once a year.

Anonymous

Definitely agree with all of the anon's on this forum about servicing. It is all about the type of chair you are using and what the manufacturer recommends.Some of the more up-to-date evacuation chairs need minimum servicing, but chairs need to be checked on a regular basis, to ensure optimum safety.

mike deveney
Member - 1 post

All the above comments are interesting, but overall training, and monitoring procedures are in place and checked, is the key.I would rather face a charge of possibly injuring a person in an evacuation situation than corporate manslaughter by failing to take action,i.e. sticking someone in a room.Proper training will help avoid injuries, and the chair is a real option on getting disabled people out of the building.This is an option that cannot be dismissed by a responsible employer, especially with members of the public on the premises.

Julian Wilkinson
Member - 43 posts

After reading all of the above posts with a high degree of interest.

I recently posted on here asking about the life span of these chairs. As I found it quite shocking that we were recommended (hard sell type)by the supplier that we should (well 'must' was the word used) change them after 10 years! we have 16 of them and the average price of these things is a £1,000 each!. I have no concerns about their usefulness in the event of an emergency (and I certainly would not condone leaving anyone behind for someone else to deal with) only that if the person in the chair is much heavier than the person holding on to it they will probably end up in a heap at the bottom of the staircase!. Therefore our Fire Wardens have been instructed to assign two men to assist anyone who needs assistance whether they make use of the evac chair or not. Out of hours is different matter of course.
Having said all that I do not like the hard sell approach I received for having to change the chairs after 10 years (16 of them). Along with some of the advice I received, we have chosen not to change them but we will keep them on an annual maintenance programme, which i might add is with the same company who did not object to the renewal of the contract!

Valerie Reed
Member - 2 posts

From Barry Scholes, Managing Director Evac+Chair International Ltd

Julian,

an Evac+Chair costs £650 plus VAT, and has been so for over 3 years. After 10 years it?s beyond its normal life, and as a life safety product, one should consider replacing these with our new for old scheme, offering £150 against a new Evac+Chair. Also available is a low cost rental scheme that has just been introduced. Although after 10 years, under the Servicare Agreement, the Evac+Chair has reached the end of its serviceable life, we will continue to provide spares and replacement parts for older chairs. However the Company does not accept any liability after the end of this 10 year period.

Evac+Chairs are manufactured in Birmingham and not in Holland or any other country.

For more information about Evac+Chairs visit http://www.evacchair.co.uk

Aindre Reece-Sheerin
Member - 2 posts

I am pleased to note my best friend and professional colleague Paul Houghton adding his expertise here to this string. Quite a few of the comments have been suggesting a procative approach to any 'given' situation. I agree that training is paramount and, just a importantly as Paul suggests that the Disabled Person take charge of themself in the first instance in such situations. Evac chairs do have their use as do fire doors. I agree also that 30 minutes for a fire door in unrealistic and many of the buildins I visit as an Access Consultant leave a lot to be desired in terms of simple integrety. Ask yourself this question - do you really still want to be in a building 30 minutes after all else have evacuated? In a building of more than one floor I always recommend that at least two people on site should at the very least be appraised of what to do during such alerts.
Aindre Reece-Sheerin Access Consultant

Craig Rowland
Member - 4 posts

On partaking a course on the correct use of Evac chairs, I fell out of one and cracked a rib. I would avoid their use at all costs.........!

John Clenaghan
Member - 5 posts

HI everyone
I made comments in January 2004 when this all started about the EvacChair. At that time I tried to get it accross that to leave (and it is still in some fire poiicies in the UK) the resident in the room and either get yourself out or leave a member of staff with them (draw a straw, I suggested).
Well times have changed with the RRO and The Fire Safety Scotland Act. The HTM 84 and SHTM 84 V3 gave guidance then on the number of doors between two fire corridor doors and depending on this number a calculation on how many staff should be present on the night shift. Well that was then and now we have PEEP's Personal Emergency Egress Plans, they are an extension to the care plan for every resident.
The regs state something like "a calculation should be made to determine the number of staff who can safely evacuate the residensts to a place of temporary shelter"
This should be further looked at - if a fire/smoke was on the ground floor, then a safe evacuation should be made on this floor and directly above or vice versa - good so far. It also states, that ideally all high dependance residents (in most cases that is almost 95% of the capacity) should be on the ground floor. Further that before a resident is brought into a home they should be assesed not just at that time but at least 6 months hence on their dependancy level for evacuation; it really gets better, eh!. Imaginge now having to move residents from an upper floor to a lower one because some person thinks this might work (ideally it's the way it should be) but Nursing and Care staff live in a real world and they know that most cliets are confused when they arrive and to do this would further complicate a worsening situation.

So what should be done:
1. EvacChair I think is the best solution.
2 That Lifts should be brought into use. I am consious that most lifts are not fire lifts, but depending on the size of the home the fire separation of the units, having at least two lifts in the home where clients can be moved horizontally to a lift in an unnafected Zone. The lift has a secondary power supply - it leads directly to a final exit. A full and robust Risk Assessment is in place then why not use lifts. That's what I think - but I can hear you all saying we don't have this nor would we like it or it is too much to have in place - then an Aid To Evacuation must and should be in place. Believe me the regs state that the Fire & rescue Service are not there to effect a rescue/evacuation of residents, yes, I know they will still rescue people but care staff/ hospitals/ hotels and any other place, HMO's etc must be in a position to effect the rescue.
One final comment - some comments have been made about doors and I mentioned 30-minute FR door. In my time as a Senior Fire Officer I have seen in houses where the fire has totally destroyed one room and the next room is only smelling of smoke (no smoke or heat seals fitted there), further I have proved it to all the customers we have that a fire door can hold back the fire greater than the 30-minutes stated it depends on good management and maintenance officers and a robust programme of alerting management to faults.
In most care homes the damage caused to fire doors (coridor & Bedroom) are caused by wheelchairs - drug trolley - cleaning trolley etc. Well this is easy to overcome, fit single swing arms - if you have "Dorgards" then be wary, unless you have risked assess these there is a possibility and evidence of residents and others being injured because they have closed due to the vacuum cleaner noise closing them and I have evidence of them sticking in the open position due to the plunger tearing the carpet - fit single swin arms elelctrcally linked to the fire alarm and power supply.

I am as you can see committed to Ensuring a safe a secure method escape no matter who you are or your impairment. I am getting older and maybe go into a care home, at least I have seen the ones I would not go to, but it may not be my choice.

These are many areas of the RRO and the FSS act., that need to be looked at, read it if you have not already done so I am sure like me you will be left wondering who the hell wrote these.

John Clenaghan
fire.risccorp@blueyonder.co.uk

Peter Jones
Member - 4 posts

Dear All,

The main discussion is of course that a person needs to be evacuated as safe and a fast as possible taking into account the shock of being in an emergency situation. The problem with Evac-Chair is that transfer is difficult and that it wouldn't be the first time that someone falls out of the chair. Has nobody looked at better alternatives as we are using Ferno Chairs. Ferno has worked with the ambulance service and fire service for many years and I find that their chairs are superior due to their experience. Evac-Chair is a good marketing company but its products have caused difficulty. I agree that we need to ensure safe evacuation and that training is key to be familiar with the products.

Kind regards,

Valerie Reed
Member - 2 posts

Sorry Peter
I disagree. The Evac+Chair is a Class 1 Medical device, and all incidences as you describe above are fully reportable to MRHA. There has been no incidences ever reported that anybody fell out of the Evac+Chair since it was first introducd in UK in 1987. The design of the low slung hammock, and the safety harness would make this techniclly impossible. Unlike the new Ferno product in which the passenger/patient sits on a flat surface with a higher centre of gravity, In my opinion the Evac+Chair is the safest in its class. The Evac+Chair pedigree and world wide sales as a building evacuation chair speaks for itself, whereas many new products have only been introduced into the market since 2002.

Barry M Scholes
for and on behalf of Evac+Char International Ltd.

Alan Cox - First for Fire & Safety
Online advisor - 56 posts

Having read many of the replies on this subject I thought that I would add some of my experience to the matter which I hope will clarify some of the issues.
When I worked for the NHS I was fortunate to be awarded an Allen Brooking Travel Fellowship which allowed me to study Fire Safety in The USA and for part of the time I worked with a Fire Training Consultant that specialised in Hospital Fire Safety and Evacuation. One part of his evacuation training that really impressed me was when he picked on a very petite nurse and gets her to move him out of a burning bed on her own - he was about 22 stone in weight. This is quite an experience and one nurse that refused to do the procedure was sent out of the training session with the words "it you can't do it here you won't do it in a real situation". I’m not suggesting that we go down this route but I have not seen training this realistic before.
When I returned home this experience got me thinking that much of what we do in a training environment is for effect and does not really reflect reality - you only have to see a film of a demonstration plane evacuation and look at the people that are taking part to realise that this does not truly reflect a typical occupancy. In an effort to bring reality into evacuation methods I looked at the subject in depth and worked with physiotherapists to produce a two part video on the problem of evacuating non ambulant people. The first part dealt with Manual Evacuation Techniques and the second on using Evacuation Aids and what I tried to do in the manual evacuation video was to use very heavy people because in reality this is what you may be required to do, in some situations on your own – and yes it can be done safely.
The second video which was the subject that this thread refers to was about using Evacuation Aids and here I sought the advice of the Ambulance Service that have to deal with these problems every day and if you look at some of the methods that they use you will find that they use Ambulance Chairs for many of their situations. These are generally a well constructed light weight chair with wheels/ carrying handles and straps to restrain the person and are very good for the job and cost a lot less than some other devices on the market. It is also possible to use any chair in this way in an emergency but of course the people using it would require training and I included this in the video. I looked at a cross section of evacuation aids in the video including the EvacChair and this enabled people to choose the method that suited the situation and this is where one of the problem lies that can only be answered by an adequate risk assessment.
Firstly, it is unlikely that one method or one piece of equipment will provide the answer, and secondly, whichever methods you choose people will require training and the equipment will require maintenance. The more complex the equipment – the more expensive it’s likely to be so before you go down this route look at the easy option and the simple pieces of equipment which may do the same job just as well.
Alan Cox
mail@alanfcox.co.uk

Steve Woodford
Member - 1 post

Evac chairs have a place certain environments as do ski pads and albac mats.
I must pick up on one point raised hwere it was suggested that persons stay in the building and wait for the fire service.
Under the Fire Safety Order 2005 the person responsible is required to make adequate arrangements for getting all occupants out of the building without the assistance of the fire service

The role of the fire service is to fight fire and carry out emergency rescues.

We also now have to consider PEEP (personal emergencly evacuation plans) for anyone unable to evacuate without assistance. Its a new world out there for persons responsible that may include equipment such as evac chairs.
Steve Woodford
Fire Safety Consultant
Firesure UK Limited

Peter Jones
Member - 4 posts

Dear all,

I agree with that. That is the point that I am trying to raise. Ferno has been building ambulance chairs for 40 years.. My personal experience tells me that that experience is important but simplicity is key in these situations. The pricing was very attractive but I need to know that my staff has a safe escape and as an alternative Ferno has offered me more confidence. As mr Scholes has a point that Paraid has the experience but this is also their advantage as they are well known. Ferno is less known in this market but I have found that their products are well liked by me staff and the training shows their experience.


Kind regards,

Peter Jones

David Ransome
Member - 21 posts

As highlighted the Ambulance service use these types of chair everyday, users of buildings generally don't - even those trained. Yes they can be useful but personally I'd rather slide, roll or crawl down stairs etc to get away from danger when at least I've got an element of control rather than being strapped into a chair and trundled into oblivion! (I am occasionally in a wheelchair and hemiplaegic). Many others have agreed with my view!
For people using them to move people about in buildings - are they aware and trained to deal with manual handling issues, personal liability insurance - do they have it?; latter usually under business' policy.
People must not be 'forced' to operate or use them, just as they have an element of choice in whether to use a fire extinguisher or not!

Peter Jones
Member - 4 posts

This is an interesting point. We first considered the Evac+Chair and as highlighted by Mr Scholes his chairs are priced lower than most chairs. The issue we had and still have is:
1.) lateral transfer is very difficult due to the way the seating is constructed
2.) Our people felt less safe sitting in the chair and had difficulty with some stairs due to their incline.

In my personal opinion we need the best chair possible to evacuate a building but nobody discusses what we need to do to create the best chair. Who has tried other chairs than Evac and has got a good comparison?

Yours sincerely,


Peter Jones

David Sharp - Workplace Law Network
Online advisor - 134 posts

Slightly disconcertingly, I note that I started this thread more than five years ago!

Seeing as you asked, Peter, I recently attended the Universities Health and Safety Association autumn conference in Cambridge. One of the exhibitors there was a company called FERNO (http://www.ferno.co.uk) who I had not come across before. They appear to provide a range of transport solutions targeted at the medical profession, but had an evacution chair on view that could be used to evacuate up stairs as well as down.

I've no experience or knowledge of them, but the guy at the stand seemed very knowledgeable and helpful.

Peter Jones
Member - 4 posts

Thanks David,

I have had a look at their website and it looks very good. Have you got contact details of the person you spoke to by any chance ?

Yours sincerely,

Peter Jones

Andrew Carey
Member - 1 post

Our workplace recently trained a few EVAC chair operators, shortly after there was a real alarm ( toaster fire ), and as there were no disabled people on my floor I went straight down the nearest stairs and out. The EVAC operator on the opposite wing waited at the top of the stair well with the EVAC chair open, ' in case anyone needed assistance ', although he knew no-one had used the service lift that day to enter our floor. Who's following the right process here, as I thought a disabled person ( in our case someone who has used the service lift to get to our floor ) has to make themselves known so that the EVAC operator can identify them as needing assistance the moment an emergency happens, and you're not meant to wait around at the top of a stairwell just in case someone who wasn't previously disabled but has been injured in the incident shows up, however noble they are being.

John Clenaghan
Member - 5 posts

Andrew

If anyone (Visitor-Contractor) ventures onto your property then you should ensure that they inform someone in control that they have an impairment that may affect their ability to act and respond to a fire alarm and make their way out to the assembly point.
The PEEP regulations indicates that you should have made arrangements to ensure those with a mobility impairment can be taken out of the building and if "an aid to evacuation" is required then the required numbers of staff should be trained in its use.
You did it right and to be fair so did your colleague - as both of you were not informed if a "buddy system" was necessary then both were unsure and did you best in a given situation (an evacuation).

What should happen is as mentioned above any person with an impairment should be known to staff (evacuation team), he/she should make themselves known to the person with the impairment and where you should meet should they require assistance, not necessarily an evacuation.

This should all form part of your evacuation plan with no exceptions.
I hope this helps. Further infonation can be found in the fire law site.

John Clenaghan
fire.risccorp@blueyonder.co.uk