Water safety at managed sites: What are your legal obligations?

Reggie Robinson, RoSPA Water & Leisure Consultant, and Carlene McAvoy, RoSPA’s Head of Policy, look at the legislation affecting open water features within managed sites and how RoSPA can help.

On average, there are 282 accidental water-related fatalities every year in the UK. Behind every statistic is a person, a family and a community. Site managers and duty holders play a critical role in reducing risk and supporting the sector's shared ambition: Towards zero drownings: building a future where everyone in the UK can be safe in, on and around the water.

Through UK and nation-specific drowning prevention strategies, there is a renewed focus on strengthening the proactive management of water-related risk. A key expectation is that duty holders and landowners adopt robust water safety policies and take a proportionate, risk-based approach to managing sites with water hazards.

Open water features can include sustainable drainage assets (such as attenuation ponds, swales, wetlands) and rivers, lakes/lochs, watercourses or other water bodies. If you manage sites containing any of these features, are you aware of the relevant laws, regulations and responsibilities that apply?

The legal framework

Whenever responsibility for a site transfers to a new owner or managing organisation, so too does responsibility for managing any water-related risks. Whether the site is newly developed or long-established, those responsible must understand the legal and regulatory frameworks that apply.

The legal framework for water safety spans both criminal and civil law. While some duties are imposed by legislation and enforced by regulators, others arise through the civil courts, where a failure to manage risk has resulted in harm or loss. Understanding both is essential to meeting your responsibilities as a duty holder.

Criminal law

The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 (HSWA) sets out the duties of employers to protect the health, safety and welfare of employees and others who may be affected by their undertaking.

Section 3.1 of the Act places a duty on employers to conduct their undertaking in such a way, so far as is reasonably practicable, that persons not in their employment who may be affected are not exposed to risk. It is not necessary for harm to have occurred for a duty holder to be found in breach.

“Reasonably practicable” requires a judgement that balances the risk on one side against the time, money and effort (sacrifice) required to avert it. The presumption is weighted towards taking measures unless the sacrifice is grossly disproportionate. This means property management companies must assess the risks presented and measures to reduce those risks so far as is reasonably practicable.

The extent of the duty will depend on the circumstances, including whether the water feature forms part of the organisation’s undertaking and whether members of the public or others may foreseeably be affected by the way the site is managed.

Where the management company employs staff or engages contractors to carry out work on the site, the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 require a suitable and sufficient assessment of the risks arising from those work activities. Appropriate control measures should be implemented, supported by safe systems of work and where appropriate, documented method statements. Particular consideration should be given to activities involving work near water, work on embankments or slopes and lone working. The level of control required should be proportionate to the nature of the work and the risks presented by the specific site.

Civil law

• Occupiers' liability law

Occupiers' liability law differs across the UK. While the underlying principle is that those who control land have a duty to take reasonable care to manage risks to people who may be affected, the relevant legislation varies between England and Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. The following sections briefly outline the key duties that apply in each jurisdiction.

• Occupiers’ Liability Acts 1957 and 1984 (England and Wales)

The Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 requires occupiers to take such care as is reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure visitors are reasonably safe in using the premises for the purposes for which they are permitted to be there. The duty does not generally extend to risks willingly accepted by a visitor, although occupiers may still need to consider whether warnings or information are required where hazards are not obvious or are not readily apparent.

The Act also requires the occupier to anticipate that children may be less careful than adults. In practice, occupiers should consider whether the characteristics of the site may attract particular groups such as children, and other potentially vulnerable groups, and whether any additional precautions are reasonably required.

The Occupiers' Liability Act 1984 provides a more limited duty to trespassers, but only where the occupier knows of the danger, knows or suspects trespassers may come near it, and the risk is one against which they might reasonably be expected to offer some protection.

The case of Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council [2003] confirmed that occupiers are not generally required to protect informed adults from obvious risks arising from activities they take voluntarily, where there are no hidden hazards.  However, where reasonable risk management measures are absent (such as inadequate warnings, insufficient physical protection or absent supervision where it would be expected) the courts may consider whether the occupier has breached their duty of care.

• Scotland

Under the Occupiers' Liability (Scotland) Act 1960, an occupier has a duty to take reasonable care to ensure that people on the premises are not exposed to an unreasonable risk of injury or damage. The duty applies to those with sufficient control of the premises, including landowners and organisations responsible for managing sites.

• Northern Ireland

Under the Occupiers' Liability Act (Northern Ireland) 1957, occupiers owe visitors a duty to take reasonable care to ensure they are reasonably safe when using the premises for the purposes for which they are invited or permitted to be there.

The Occupiers' Liability Act (Northern Ireland) 1987 sets out the more limited duty owed to people who are not visitors, including trespassers, where the statutory conditions are met.

Planning obligations and land management responsibilities

Section 106 agreements are legally binding planning obligations made under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. They can secure requirements relating to the provision, maintenance and management of site features, including open spaces and sustainable drainage systems (SuDS). Relevant planning documents should be reviewed to understand any ongoing responsibilities that apply after ownership or management transfers. 

Transfer of responsibilities

Responsibility for managing water-related risks does not automatically transfer when a site changes hands.  It depends on the level of control an organisation has over the land and the arrangements in place for its management and maintenance.

For newly developed sites, responsibilities may be defined through planning obligations and handover arrangements.  For existing sites, responsibilities may be established through property transfers, leases, maintenance agreements and ownership documents.

Before accepting responsibility for a site, organisations should establish what water features are present, who is responsible for their inspection, maintenance and risk management, and whether any existing obligations or agreements apply.

Sustainable drainage systems 

Sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) are incorporated into developments to manage surface water, reduce flood risk and provide wider environmental benefits. In England, requirements for SuDS are primarily delivered through the planning system, including planning policies, conditions and, where applicable, Section 106 agreements. These arrangements may define requirements for the ongoing inspection, maintenance and management of SuDS features.

Schedule 3 of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010, which would introduce a statutory approval system for SuDS in England, has not yet commenced, although it has been implemented in Wales. Those responsible for managing sites should understand the planning documents and maintenance arrangements that apply to their SuDS features.

Signage and Public Rescue Equipment 

Signage and Public Rescue Equipment (PRE) are two commonly discussed control measures. However, the circumstances of each water feature and site determine what measures are proportionate, and neither is mandated by statute at open water on residential land. Specific recommendations are addressed as part of a formal risk site review.

• Signage: Where provided, signage should relate to the specific risk in question but is unlikely to be sufficient standalone measure for a non-obvious or significant hazard. The 2025 National Standards for Sustainable Drainage state that signage explaining the flood control function of drainage features should be provided within community spaces. Guidance on water safety signage for England is currently in development through Water Safety England with a focus on alignment with relevant ISO standards. Both Scotland and Wales already have such national guidance which is used and promoted for landowners. These can be accessed here:
  • Scotland
  • Wales
    
    
• Public Rescue Equipment: Where rescue equipment is provided, inspection and maintenance arrangements should be carried out in accordance with the manufacturers’ instructions. Missing, damaged or poorly maintained equipment may give a false sense of safety. Inspection frequency is not mandated by legislation and should reflect the usage and risks association with the site.

Documentation: Why it matters 

Whether or not specific controls such as signage or PRE are implemented, the reasoning behind the decision should be documented. The courts will consider evidence of a suitable and appropriate risk assessment approach as part of demonstrating that appropriate judgement and reasonably practicable measures have been applied. Application of collectively agreed guidance, or more compelling regulation, will shape whether reasonably practicable measures were taken.

Risk assessments should not be treated as static documents. They should be reviewed periodically and when site conditions, usage patterns or management arrangements change, with any identified control measures being implemented and maintained in practice.

There is also increasing national focus on the development of water safety policies that extend beyond individual site controls, reflecting the wider strategic direction of the sector towards a more coordinated and preventative approach to reducing drowning. These policies typically bring together the risk review documentation, risk management processes of the organisations and link to wider national measures such as education, awareness and communication strategies, supporting a more consistent and proactive approach to water safety.

How RoSPA’s safety reviews support the management company 

RoSPA’s safety reviews provide an independent, expert snapshot of site conditions at a point in time, with practical recommendations for improvements. They are not a substitute for the management company’s own ongoing obligations, but they provide a documented evidence base that supports the exercise of those obligations.

• Public Open Space (POS) Review: A comprehensive review of POS within a managed development: footpaths, landscaping and communal features (excludes play areas/equipment). Identifies conditions and recommends improvements, providing a documented baseline at the point of handover or periodic review.
  
  
• SuDS Safety Review: A specialist review of sustainable drainage assets - attenuation ponds, swales, wetland features, drainage channels - assessing condition, accessibility, hazard profile and the proportionality of existing controls. Produces a site-specific record of conditions observed and recommendations for the management company to consider.
  
  
• Water Safety Review: A review covering open water - rivers, lakes, ponds, watercourses. Considers signage, rescue equipment provision, edge management, access and seasonal risk variation. Provides a snapshot of conditions and prioritised recommendations.

Each review provides management companies with evidence relevant to their legal position and supports a broader understanding of the issues discussed in this article. As well as considering the duties, obligations and responsibilities that may arise in different circumstances, the reviews provide additional context, practical considerations and reference to relevant case law. This helps organisations understand how the legal principles outlined in this article may apply in practice and supports informed, proportionate decision-making.