Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Shoes common corridor?
My mother recently fell while walking past our neighbour's front part of the common corridor.
They were having a party and over a hundred pairs of shoes were all over the place. The shoes covered the floor and blocked the lift entrance and she tripped and fell as there was no warning.
The management is saying that she herself is to be blamed as she should have been more careful.
Plus, they argued, shoes and shoes racks are a common practise in Asia/Singapore.
This, despite the fact that, the by-laws states:
A SP or an occupier of a lot shall not obstruct the lawful use of the common property by any person, except on a temporary and non-recurring basis.
Looking at this situation, who is right?
Does "culture" supercedes "law"?
Should the context of culture be taken into account?
There was a reason why my mother did not notice.
At the time, she was transporting some potted plants from the basement carpark to our floor level.
So she was holding a carton box, in which three small potted plants were placed in. So she could not see the shoes.
Plus the obstruction of the shoes occurred daily, but just the large scale as that day.
4 Answers
- Mr WarriorLv 71 decade agoFavorite Answer
Law is law.
Culture is just that. Just because there is a culture of heroin use in a suburb does not make it legal.
Thats the response i would have given.
It means that if by law, that corridor is meant to be free from obstruction. Thats exactly what it means.
It is managements responsibility to notify people living there to not leave stuff in the corridor. It is a failure on their part.
I will tell you why..........Because people will fall over things if they are NOT mean to be there. More importantly, and this is where u can prove your point...........In case of fire, by law, those corridors HAVE to be obstruction free in case of evacuation.
It is a breach of occupational health and safety laws by having corridors obsturcted with shoes in the passageway. If there is a fire and people trip over those shoes, get caught in the fire. They die. Any court will find the management negligent.
If a court is told about the culture of the place. The court will respond that the culture is there due to the negligence of management in notifying people living there of what is expected (obstruction free).
Its a fire hazard. Thats where u can make your case. It is stopping evacuation exit and safe passage.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
I think the person having the party should have ensured the stairs were kept clear.
I think your Mom could have noticed 100 pairs of shoes.
Management could have had a better response. Afterall, they are responsible for the safety of all tenants.
One party- not a big deal. Change in safety for all on a regular basis- needs to be addressed formally.
- Nona said soLv 71 decade ago
It does suck that your mother fell down but I think your mother should have noticed over ONE HUNDRED pairs of shoes in the hallway...
Besides, it even states in they by-law that it is ok "on a temporary and non-recurring basis." You said they were having a party....it sounds like it just happened once...
