Author Topic: Strange fire alarm system in the New Year 2008 ???  (Read 39771 times)

Offline Benzerari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1391
    • http://benzerari.tripod.com/fas/
Strange fire alarm system in the New Year 2008 ???
« Reply #15 on: January 07, 2008, 12:22:47 PM »
Quote from: Wiz
How about having a box to tick on service inspection reports that said something like: Previously advised system deficiences NOT yet rectified, instead of re-confirming all the problems on each visit?
That's a good idea why not?

And we provide a full details of these abnormalities to the customer when he wakes up.

If he is a customer of first priority I would run.... behind him, but if he is not your idea would be ideal...

Offline David Rooney

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 891
    • http://ctafire.co.uk
Strange fire alarm system in the New Year 2008 ???
« Reply #16 on: January 07, 2008, 01:20:43 PM »
Our BAFE man advised that we should repeat all non conformities after every service visit to cover our backs....
CTA Fire - BAFE SP203 - F Gas Accredited - Wireless Fire Alarm System Specialists - Established 1985 - www.ctafire.co.uk
Natural Born Cynic

Offline Wiz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1591
Strange fire alarm system in the New Year 2008 ???
« Reply #17 on: January 07, 2008, 01:44:16 PM »
Quote from: Benzerari
Quote from: Wiz
How about having a box to tick on service inspection reports that said something like: Previously advised system deficiences NOT yet rectified, instead of re-confirming all the problems on each visit?
That's a good idea why not?

And we provide a full details of these abnormalities to the customer when he wakes up.

If he is a customer of first priority I would run.... behind him, but if he is not your idea would be ideal...
Obviously 'previously advised' deficiences have to have been advised previously and not subsequently or 'when he wakes up'. Otherwise it would be a silly to 'tick the box'!!

Quote from: David Rooney
Our BAFE man advised that we should repeat all non conformities after every service visit to cover our backs....
I don't disagree with the advice. It is sensible as long as it doesn't annoy the customer. British Standard's doesn't specifically ask for it.

However, from the service provider's viewpoint it can't be cost-effective. It's time-consuming enough to have to re-check whether previously defficiences have been attended to (if you don't re-check, it's odds-on that he has had someone else in to do so, and make you look silly when you 'report' it again) but to have to keep listing all non-conformities on each visit is time-consuming.

Chris Houston

  • Guest
Strange fire alarm system in the New Year 2008 ???
« Reply #18 on: January 07, 2008, 01:57:51 PM »
Compliance with British Standards is not a legal requirement.

Compliance with the Signs and Signals regulations is! - so with regards to the acceptability of the fire alarm systems, even if the Fire Safety Risk Assessment concludes that the fire alarm is OK, it is illegal and must be replaced.

Offline Wiz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1591
Strange fire alarm system in the New Year 2008 ???
« Reply #19 on: January 07, 2008, 02:09:13 PM »
Quote from: Chris Houston
Compliance with British Standards is not a legal requirement.

Compliance with the Signs and Signals regulations is! - so with regards to the acceptability of the fire alarm systems, even if the Fire Safety Risk Assessment concludes that the fire alarm is OK, it is illegal and must be replaced.
Chris, please explain your understanding of non-compliance with S&S reg. when the original post confirmed.........'when tested the call points, alarm went off normally'

Chris Houston

  • Guest
Strange fire alarm system in the New Year 2008 ???
« Reply #20 on: January 07, 2008, 02:17:57 PM »
I don't have time to look up the exact wording, but in simple terms the Signs and Signals regs require a battery backup for all safety alarm systems.  Unlike a British Standard, this is not a recommendation but a legal requirement.

Offline AnthonyB

  • Firenet Extinguisher Expert
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2477
    • http://www.firewizard.co.uk
Strange fire alarm system in the New Year 2008 ???
« Reply #21 on: January 07, 2008, 03:16:43 PM »
The Health and Safety (Signs and Signals) Regulations 1996 relate to the requirements of safety signs and signals used at work.

Clause 2, Interpretation, of these Regulations states within Section (1) the following text:
““fire safety sign” means a sign (including an illuminated sign or an acoustic signal) which –
(i) provides information of escape routes and emergency exits in case of fire;
(ii) provides information on the identification or location of fire fighting equipment; or
(iii) gives warning in case of fire”

As a fire alarm may be signalled by a visual or audible signal, such devices are included within the Regulations.

Schedule 1, Part 1, Section 8 of the Regulations states:
“8 Signs requiring some form of power must be provided with a guaranteed emergency supply in the event of a power cut, unless the hazard has thereby been eliminated.”

By taking the requirements of these clauses into account, the use of mains powered fire alarm systems with no standby power supply is not acceptable if they are provided as a means of meeting health and safety requirements in a place of work. In such places, fire alarm systems complying with the requirements of BS5839-1: 1988 or 2002 would normally be recommended.
Anthony Buck
Owner & Fire Safety Consultant at Fire Wizard


Extinguisher/Fire History Enthusiast

Fire Extinguisher Facebook Group:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=65...415&ref=ts
http://www.youtube.com/user/contactacb
https://uk.linkedin.com/in/anthony-buck-36

Offline Benzerari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1391
    • http://benzerari.tripod.com/fas/
Strange fire alarm system in the New Year 2008 ???
« Reply #22 on: January 07, 2008, 03:42:12 PM »
Chris; can you please re-explain

this:

Quote from: Chris Houston
Compliance with British Standards is not a legal requirement..
and that

Quote from: Chris Houston
so with regards to the acceptability of the fire alarm systems, even if the Fire Safety Risk Assessment concludes that the fire alarm is OK, it is illegal and must be replaced.
on what basis it must be replaced if you said, 'compliance with British Standards is not a legal requirement'

do you mean it is just a good practice to comply with the standard BS5839.

I still haven't got the point.

Thank you

Offline Benzerari

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1391
    • http://benzerari.tripod.com/fas/
Strange fire alarm system in the New Year 2008 ???
« Reply #23 on: January 07, 2008, 04:01:37 PM »
I remember 4 years ago I had been several times in a situation where the main PCB board of the panel was gone, in a week end and at night, I did not have choice, I used to build up a very basic circuit to combine the zone circuits with the sounder circuits and make the MCPs operation working OK, just by using external relays and resistors, and by using the silence button... the circuit had been tested OK, and it was just for temporary measures till the next working day so we can order a proper brand new panel...

The main point is that, I had been told that time that the circuit was not acceptable just because it was not complying to BS5839... due to a lots of monitoring are required too... and if any incident happens I am the first responsible...

so what is the difference between this basic circuit and the very old basic fire alarm system which still in use in that school?

Offline AnthonyB

  • Firenet Extinguisher Expert
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2477
    • http://www.firewizard.co.uk
Strange fire alarm system in the New Year 2008 ???
« Reply #24 on: January 07, 2008, 04:02:47 PM »
It is illegal as it does not conform to the absolute requirement contained in the The Health and Safety (Signs and Signals) Regulations 1996.

In theory there is no absolute duty under fire regs to replace it unless your FRA dictates it is not suitable & sufficient to meet the duty to provide fire warning - it is the Health & Safety regulations that make it mandatory in all circumstances.

Just because a fire alarm does not meet the latest BS5839 edition does not always mean it requires it's replacement - however if it doesn't meet The Health and Safety (Signs and Signals) Regulations requirements then it does
Anthony Buck
Owner & Fire Safety Consultant at Fire Wizard


Extinguisher/Fire History Enthusiast

Fire Extinguisher Facebook Group:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=65...415&ref=ts
http://www.youtube.com/user/contactacb
https://uk.linkedin.com/in/anthony-buck-36

Offline Wiz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1591
Strange fire alarm system in the New Year 2008 ???
« Reply #25 on: January 07, 2008, 05:03:00 PM »
Guys, this is going around in circles a bit.

It is understood and accepted that the S & S regs. are a legal requirement. You appear to be applying it to the situation of this specific original post. If so, please confirm where this specifically described system doesn't comply. As far as I read it, the system has signals, they operate when expected to do so, and there is no mention of there not being a standby power supply. Also what does Anthony B mean by an 'absolute requirement' in the context of this specific post?
Just because Benzerari says there are non-compliances with some of the very many recommendations of BS5839 part 1 2002, surely it can't be said that it then always fails the S & S regulations? If the non-compliances do not relate to the specifc definitions of the S&S regulations then surely they are not applicable?

We musn't allow subjects to get confused on this site. Too many people rely on it for definitive answers.

Offline Wiz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1591
Strange fire alarm system in the New Year 2008 ???
« Reply #26 on: January 07, 2008, 05:17:22 PM »
Quote from: Benzerari
Chris; can you please re-explain

this:

Quote from: Chris Houston
Compliance with British Standards is not a legal requirement..
and that

Quote from: Chris Houston
so with regards to the acceptability of the fire alarm systems, even if the Fire Safety Risk Assessment concludes that the fire alarm is OK, it is illegal and must be replaced.
on what basis it must be replaced if you said, 'compliance with British Standards is not a legal requirement'

do you mean it is just a good practice to comply with the standard BS5839.

I still haven't got the point.

Thank you
Benzerari, BS 5839 is a code of practice containing recommendations. These recommendations are not law.  Even if you didn't follow BS5839 recommendations, you might be able to argue that your alternative solutions are equally applicable and as suitable as a BS 5839 recommendation. However, by following BS5839 recommendations it could always be strongly argued, in any situation, that you followed a recognised published code of practice and what else could you be expected to do?. However, the foreword of BS5839 part 1 2002 also states ' Compliance with British Standard does not of itself confer immunity from legal obligations' !

Offline Wiz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1591
Strange fire alarm system in the New Year 2008 ???
« Reply #27 on: January 07, 2008, 05:24:02 PM »
Quote from: Benzerari
I remember 4 years ago I had been several times in a situation where the main PCB board of the panel was gone, in a week end and at night, I did not have choice, I used to build up a very basic circuit to combine the zone circuits with the sounder circuits and make the MCPs operation working OK, just by using external relays and resistors, and by using the silence button... the circuit had been tested OK, and it was just for temporary measures till the next working day so we can order a proper brand new panel...

The main point is that, I had been told that time that the circuit was not acceptable just because it was not complying to BS5839... due to a lots of monitoring are required too... and if any incident happens I am the first responsible...

so what is the difference between this basic circuit and the very old basic fire alarm system which still in use in that school?
In the circumstances you mention, if your provided solution put the system in a better position than how you found it, and there was no better solution you were capable of providing, and you eventually effected the proper repair in the quickest time practically possible, I would put it to the judge that you had done the very best that you could have been expected to achieve and should be found not guilty!

Chris Houston

  • Guest
Strange fire alarm system in the New Year 2008 ???
« Reply #28 on: January 07, 2008, 05:44:19 PM »
I'll try again to be as clear as possible.  The signs and signals regulations apply to all fire alarm systems (or at least all all in workplaces) and make it a legal requirement that all fire alarm systems have a battery backup.  This one doesn't and is therefore illegal.

Offline Wiz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1591
Strange fire alarm system in the New Year 2008 ???
« Reply #29 on: January 07, 2008, 05:50:07 PM »
Chris, Ill also try again to be as clear as possible.

I have extracted the relevant part of the original post and shown it below.

Where does it say that there is no battery back-up?

Quote from: Benzerari
It is a school with very old fire alarm system, it is sort of manual fire alarm system, the panel is the power supply itself with no buttons, a small basic PCB circuit inside, with one zone and sounder circuits, when tested the call points alarm went off normally, but the system can be silenced just by puling off the test key, there are no detectors at all in the whole school. Only fire exits, corridors and main entrance have call points, also in the corridors between call point and the next one to it, there is more than 45m. The sounder and zone circuits are not monitored for short and open circuits...

Benzerari