Play areas and adventure parks are potential minefields for insurers facing claims for injured children. David Scott focuses on the equipment in these areas and recommends action needed to reduce the risk of liability
In our increasingly litigious society there are no longer unfortunate accidents. Someone has to be blamed. And, as we know from television advertising, "where there's blame, there's a claim" and someone has to pay.
So owners and operators of children's play areas have been subjected to rising numbers of claims from parents of children injured as a result of using the equipment provided.
The position has reached crisis point - both public and private sectors have been considering closing playgrounds, because they cannot afford the risk of being sued for damages. They are struggling to pay the soaring insurance premium for such a high-risk area.
It has been a feature of recent articles regarding playgrounds - generally in the public sector - that due to levels of claims and acts of vandalism, local authorities are increasingly considering closing such facilities. This action has generated much local opposition.
Such facilities, ranging from the public playgrounds and schools of numerous local authorities to "household name" holiday parks and forest villages, are vital for children.
Safe levels of risk
The parks keep children occupied and exercised so they can learn social skills by interacting with other children. But the equipment in the play areas is becoming increasingly sophisticated to retain children's interest and attention in a world dominated by video games. This in itself can increase the likelihood of accidents and claims.
It is an inherent factor in adventure playgrounds that, by definition, they are not entirely risk-free. To reduce them to an ultra safe and sterile environment would prove neither interesting nor challenging to its users and would lead to the facility not being used.
However, they do need to be reasonably safe within context. As in all insurance issues, there are a number of straightforward steps that organisations can take to minimise risk and to limit the potential for claims.
First, equipment should be purchased from a reputable contractor whose expertise can be relied on. If contractors are negligent in their design, they will ultimately be joined in the proceedings to indemnify the operator.
If claims arise, it is generally the case that the suppliers will co-operate, voluntarily taking over the litigation to preserve their working relationship with a valuable customer - this equipment is by no means cheap.
Comply with standards
Ensure that, where appropriate, impact-absorbing surfaces, such as bark or rubber matting - specifically to minimise head injuries to children falling off play equipment - are in place. Maintain these at the correct depth and as per the manufacturers' and installers' guidelines and keep hard copies of the regular checklists.
Check that the equipment complies with all of the relevant British (or increasingly, European) standards applicable.
If new equipment is being installed, have a "health check" from the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (Rospa) to ensure the equipment has been fitted correctly and is considered appropriate.
A written report from Rospa has great evidential benefits. Organisations would also be well advised to have Rospa comment on the design before installation.
Supervision is also an essential consideration. Where the operator is not required to supervise, spell out the importance to the parents of supervision by appropriate signage, along with any rules and other safety features. Signs themselves are regular targets for vandalism - check them and keep copies of the inspections.
Finally, it is vital that the equipment is regularly inspected and maintained. Claims are on the increase from parents of children who have injured themselves as a result of playing on vandalised equipment (or broken glass).
As with any insurance dilemma, it has to be a balance between the provision of the equipment against the risk of being sued. But by ensuring that certain basic steps are carried out, both the insurer and insured can satisfy themselves that the equipment is safe, well maintained and operating properly.
David Scott is a partner and head of insurance at Hill Dickinson
