Tonight:
4°c
London firefighters were called out 14,000 times in the last year to rescue people trapped in lifts - at a cost of £4.1 million.
One in every 10 calls received by the Fire Brigade between October 2008 and September 2009 were for help opening faulty lift doors at flats, offices, care homes and department stores. In each case a fire engine and crew was deployed at a cost of £300 a time.
There were 122 properties attended more than 10 times in the 12 month period - some more than 30 times.
Today chairman of the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority, councillor Brian Coleman, said the situation had got so ridiculous that they would now be charging those who own and manage buildings where firefighters are persistently called out, a fee for each release.
"Public safety is our priority and firefighters will always attend genuine emergencies where people are shut in lifts and other means of rescue are not available," he said. "However it doesn't make sense for us to waste firefighters' time and public resources releasing people where there has not been an emergency.
"Sometimes we are called repeatedly to release people from the same buildings and that is simply not acceptable. Lift owners need to make proper provisions for their lifts - not firefighters".
In the last year firefighters were called out 1,688 times to buildings in Tower Hamlets, 1,543 times to those in Southwark, 1,355 times in Westminster and 959 times in Hackney.
Harrow, Havering, Kingston, merton, Richmond and Sutton had the least number of lift accidents reported. All had less than 100 call outs in the 12 month period.
Mr Coleman said: "Each call takes up the time of a fire engine and crew, and the knock on effect is a reduction in capacity to attend emergency incidents, carry out community safety work and provide essential training for firefighters."
He said a charge of £260 would now be made on the 10th lift release at the same building within a 12 month period and for all subsequent non-emergency lift releases.
Reader views (8)
'No lift company can afford to have lift engineers sitting in vans waiting for emergency calls[trap-ins], all lift fitters are working throughout the day, and will have to stop what they are doing, make that work place safe and then do battle with london traffic, no going in bus lanes, no going through red lights, no traffic getting out of your way because you blues and two's are on, and when we manage to get to the site try and find a parking place.
It is commonly the case that, no matter how well the lift company maintain a lift,if the customer will not sanction repairs and upgrades, the lift will become more unreliable, a lift company cannot force managment to spend money on their lifts.
- Alan [Lift Fitter], Barnet, Herts, 18/01/2010 21:30
Report abuse
The report reads ."There were 122 properties attended more than 10 times in the 12 month period - some more than 30 times"... so how many Fire Risk Assessments were requested of these 122 building owners, and how many improvement notices were served by the LFEPA and London Fire Brigade under The Fire Safety Reform Order 2005 before the fatal fire in Lakanal House, Sceaux Gardens, Camberwell on 3rd July 2009. Surely LFB should have been undertaking this legislative duty as well as collecting the costs for each "special service".
- Son Of A Retired Lfb Fire-Fighter, London, 29/10/2009 10:55
Report abuse
Just charge all lift owners a nominal yearly charge for every lift, in the event of a call out by the Fire Brigade. If they exceed say 6 visits in a year then they get penalised, for not fixing there lifts properly.
Persistant offenders could then be banned. A reliable scheme could easily be set up.
Oh by the way the money should go directly to a Fire Brigade fund not to a pen pushing, expense riddled department in Whitehall.
- Mr S.Port, London, 29/10/2009 01:29
Report abuse
surely if a lift breaks down you would expect the building manager to get you out, not an emergency service and as far as I can see the fire brigade will still get you out in a real emergency
- Kevin Bracey, Greenwich, 28/10/2009 16:35
Report abuse
@Joannie, It's the London FIRE brigade, not the London LIFT rescue service and 10 times a year without charge seems reasonable to me.
I think that this policy has the potential to save lives as firefighters will be available to deal with the two dangerous examples you mentioned.
- Jim, London, 28/10/2009 13:35
Report abuse
Perhaps Joannie you might like to think about what is actually being said here before just ranting. The Fire Brigade are not saying that they will not attend people shut in lifts but that in future they will charge for persistent offences.
That should mean that building management may actually now take on the responsibility that they should have been taking in the first place and ensuring that these faults do not occur.
It would hopefully vastly improve safety. For example the case in Redbridge earlier this year where the poor lady lost her life by being crushed by a faulty lift may never have happened if the lift (known to be continuously faulty) was maintained properly.
All in all this would hopefully reduce the cost to the public which then means that another vital service won't be cut.
Please look at the full picture in future.
- Jl, London, 28/10/2009 13:27
Report abuse
"they would now be charging those who own and manage buildings where firefighters are persistently called out, a fee for each release."
Why persistant offenders? If the company maintained their lifts as they should then it wouldn't happen. There should be a flat rate of £500 per call out, then they'd be more likely to call lift engineers instead of the brigade and possibly even actually maintain their lifts properly.
- Bob, Cheam, 28/10/2009 12:56
Report abuse
..How long will it be before a chip pan fire or somebody reporting smoke is downgraded? Not long. The police no longer see shoplifting, burglary and assault as a priority so it goes that the other emergency services will downgrade their definitions of what constitutes an 'emergency'. Perhaps all 3 services should issue a public statement on what is and what isn't an emergency - or would that be too embarrassing? Let's hope that there are no fatalities as a result of this ill thought out and dangerous LFB policy
- Joannie, Newham, London, 28/10/2009 11:24
Report abuse
