Plaintiff, a handyman, allegedly injured while repairing a permanent staircase, has no cause of action under Labor Law § 240 (1) because a permanent staircase is not a scaffold, ladder or other elevation related safety device ( Pennacchio v Tednick Corp., 200 A.D.2d 809), and his work did not involve "risks related to elevation differentials" requiring the furnishing or erection of such a device ( Rocovich v Consolidated Edison Co., 78 N.Y.2d 509, 514). Nor does plaintiff have a cause of action under Labor Law § 241 (6), there being no showing that a violation of a safety regulation promulgated thereunder was the proximate cause of the accident. Plaintiff fares no better under Labor Law § 200 or in common-law negligence since an owner of real property has no responsibility to one hurt through a dangerous condition that he has undertaken to fix ( McCullum v Barrington Co. 309 56th St. Co., 192 A.D.2d 489).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Kupferman, Asch, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.