Shopping centers account for a significant proportion of our business, representing a challenging environment with high footfall and a need for easily cleaned aesthetically pleasing surfaces, the latter usually equating to a smooth, hard wearing, slippery-when-wet floor product. Our experience has been that shopping centers seem to be the target of choice for fraudulent claims with a disproportionate number of slips investigated and found to have occurred on safe surfaces.
Flooring in shopping center
We have found that in the majority of cases a shopping center will present a high gloss, even polished, stone or composite floor contributing to a clean, light and inviting shopping environment. These surfaces typically offer a very good slip resistance in dry conditions but pose a significant risk of slipping in water contaminated conditions. It is thought, by those who have yet to suffer a slip compensation claim, that the risk of a wet surface can be effectively mitigated through external canopies, barrier matting, wet floor signage and spot cleaning. Sadly a number of our investigations show clearly that these measures are insufficient to prevent exposing visitors and staff alike to an undue risk of slipping.
Whilst a single slip injury compensation claim makes a compelling financial case for expenditure on anti-slip measures, relatively inexpensive steps can be taken to reduce such claims occurring. It is rare for slips to occur on clean dry surfaces, and our forensic testing invariably shows clean dry surfaces to be compliant and responsible parties free from blame. If the surface can be reliably maintained in a clean and dry condition in end use this provides the most cost effective solution without compromise on aesthetics. Many factors conspire against a dry surface however, and if this strategy is to be adopted responsible parties can expect to be found liable for slip injuries occurring on contaminated surfaces.
water ingress
It should be noted that entrance matting in many cases will not completely dry shoe soles, and it cannot prevent water ingress on wet clothing, bags or umbrellas. Rotated temporary matting will improve the drying of soles in adverse weather, but can pose a trip risk, relies on regular rotation and still won’t prevent drips from wet clothes. Sinks in toilet facilities may lead to water egress to the mall floors. The risk of spillages from shoppers must also be considered, even if water ingress can be reliably prevented, floor surfaces must be continually monitored. Following a spill the slippery surface should be cordoned off immediately, preventing access, and spot cleaned as soon as is practical. Any spot cleaning should leave the surface completely dry before it is reopened. The nightly wet clean processes should also be conducted on closed surfaces as staff members are no less likely to slip than visitors, and no less expensive to compensate. A recent visit to a large shopping centre demonstrated effective employment of these strategies, benefiting from covered car parks and extensive entrance corridors the risk of water ingress was eliminated, with surface compliance relying on the centre’s effective management of spills and cleaning.
The majority of shopping centres suffer from entrances which cannot be reliably controlled. In such cases it is recommended that an artificial dewatering area is created extending into the centre through the use of an anti-slip treatment. Many treatments are available, some can be conducted in house whilst others require professional application, these often have minimal or no impact on aesthetics, but all should be verified independently as offering a safe level of wet grip. The extent of the anti-slip area should be based on the extent of water ingress in adverse weather and can be used to create an inner dry area which can then be managed accordingly.
If internal surfaces cannot be reliably maintained in a clean and dry condition the anti-slip treatment should be extended to cover all slippery-when-wet surfaces. This is especially true where food/drink vendors operate on the surface, significantly increasing the risk of spills. The effectiveness of the anti-slip treatment is likely to be heavily dependent on cleaning, so periodic checks of slip resistance should be carried out to ensure ongoing compliance and effective defence of injury claims.
If you are unsure as to the current performance of your floor surfaces we would urge you to take action before a serious slip occurs. Forensic tests typically take place between 2 to 4 years after the slip, at which point floor surfaces may have changed significantly, so routine slip testing conducted by independent experts can provide a robust defence even when those seeking compensation commission their own test. We can provide comprehensive assessment of floor surfaces, nationwide, at competitive prices, reducing expenditure on unnecessary or ineffective risk management measures and providing robust defence of expensive slip injury claims. We remain completely independent from any anti-slip solution providers, ensuring an unbiased impartial assessment.
